124 



warranty; sale and warranty by agent, etc. 



Nor exceed it. 



Agency de- 

 termines by 

 Principal's 

 Death. 



Difference 

 between a re- 

 munerated 

 and an un- 

 remnnerated 

 Agent. 



Agent acting 

 ■without 

 proper autho- 

 rity. 



His Personal 

 responsibility. 



Where he 

 cannot be 

 sued on the 

 Contract. 



his stead, the Maxim of the law being, Delegatus non potest 

 delegare {x) . 



An Agent employed for a particular pm'pose has no 

 right to exceed his authority. Thus a Servant or other 

 person authorized to Sell a Horse, must receive payment 

 for him in money ; he cannot exchange him for another (//) . 



An Agency determines ipso facto by the death of the 

 Principal, and is also capable of being revoked by him in 

 his lifetime, with as little ceremony as it was created (s) . 



There is a difference between the Principal's rights 

 against a remunerated and against an unremunerated 

 Agent. The former, having once engaged, may be com- 

 pelled to proceed to the task which he has undertaken ; 

 the latter cannot, for his promise to do so being induced 

 by no consideration, the Pule, Ex niido p>acto non oritur 

 actio, applies. But if he do commence his task, and after- 

 wards be guilty of misconduct in performing it, he will, 

 though unremunerated, be liable for the damage so occa- 

 sioned ; since by entering upon the business, he has pre- 

 vented the employment of some better qualified person [a) . 



Wherever a party undertakes to do any act as the Agent 

 of another, if he does not possess any authority from the 

 Principal, and the other does not know it, or if he exceeds 

 the authority delegated to him, he will be personally 

 responsible to the person with whom he is dealing, for or 

 on account of the Principal {Ij) . 



If the Agent contracts in such a form as to make him- 

 self personally responsible, he cannot afterwards, whether 

 his Principal were or were not known at the time of the 

 contract, relieve himself from that responsibility [c) . And 

 where a contract is signed by one who professes to be sign- 

 ing "as Agent," but w^ho has no Principal existing at the 

 time, and the contract would be wholly inoperative unless 

 binding upon the person who signed it, he is personally 

 liable on it {cl). 



Where it clearly and expressly appears, that a person 

 really acting as Agent fairly contracts as such Agent in 

 the name of his Principal, and professes to make that 



(.r) 2 Steph. Com. 59. 



(y) Thompson Y. Davenport, 9 B. 

 & C. 78. 



(;) 2 Steph. Com. 57. 



{a) See Smith's Merc. Law, 112; 

 £atfe V. JFest, 22 L. J., C. P. 176. 



(b) Story's Commentaries, 226 ; 

 Harper v. Williams, 4 Q. B. 232. 



((•) Uiggins v. Senior, 8 M. & W. 

 845. 



[(1) Kelner v. Baxter, L. R., 2 

 C. P. 174; 36 L. J., C. P. 94. 



