Plaintiffs, as brokers, entered into a contract for the purchase of certain bonds, claiming to act for an undisclosed principal, and stipulating that they should in no manner be held liable on the contract, which, as they had reason to believe, was made by defendant under a misapprehension as to the value of the bonds; in fact, they were acting for themselves, and there was no other principal. Held, that they could not maintain an action on the contract, not as agents for an undisclosed principal, because no such principal existed, nor as principal, because by their fraudulent misrepresentation they had secured immunity from liability on the contract as such, and estopped themselves from claiming rights which were correlative with such liability. Paine v. Loeb, 96 Fed. 164, 37 C. C. A. 434.