What particular authority an agent may have had conferred on him in a given case, may be hard to decide, but as the authority of the agents rests on the principal's appointment, the Court will endeavor to determine the intentions of the parties by the language used in conferring the authority, or in the acts and conduct constituting the appointment. The power actually conferred, will be construed, in the light of the object of such an appointment, this is best gathered from the contract itself or the circumstances under which it was made.

If the agent assumes powers not reasonably intended in the authority, his act thereby is his own personal act, or even if he adopts a mode of action contrary to the manner contemplated in the authority given. A principal is bound by all acts authorized, and also for all acts done to reasonably carry out all authorized acts, and the agent in fulfilling the duties of his office may follow a usage or custom in determining the mode he shall adopt in exercising the authority given him.

The apparent authority of the agent, is the authority that third persons may reasonably assume the agent actually possesses where the third persons rely thereon in good faith and without notice of any secret limitation by way of instruction to the agent. The authority of the special agent is in every case, however, deemed to be much more restricted than the general agent.1 Because, a person dealing with an agent whose authority extends only to the doing of a particular thing, is put much more on inquiry as to the will of the principal in the mode of performing the particular thing designated. The special agent is not one of implied powers. The general agent's power would not be so confined. The duty is on the principal to publish the limitations of a general agency.