Into Universal Agents, General Agents, and Special Agents.

A Universal Agent is one who is appointed to do all

acts on behalf of his principal, and whose authority is so

extensive that it would be impossible for him to exceed it :

but it seems probable that such an agent has never existed

In fact.

A General Agent is one who is appointed to do all acts

of a particular class on behalf of his principal. In the case

of a general agent, the principal is bound, as between him-

self and a third party, not only by all the acts of his

agent done within his actual authority, but also by all acts

done within the scope of the apparent authority which he

has held the agent out as possessing, or allowed him to

assume. And where the agent does not come under one

of those classes of mercantile agents the extent of whose

authority is now settled by implication of law, then the

extent of the authority will be inferred as a matter of fact

from the conduct of the parties, and the general circum-

stances of the business for which the agent is employed ;

22 THE LAW OF AGENOT.

and as a general rule whatever authority is necessary or

ordinarily incidental to the carrying out of the object of

the agency, will be implied. The principal can of course

modify the general authority with which his agent is

invested by specific instructions ; but, unless such modifi-

cation is known, or by reasonable diligence might have

been known, to a third party, the principal will neverthe-

less be bound, as between himself and such third party, by

all acts done within the apparent authority with which his

agent is invested.

A Special Agent is one who is appointed to do a specific

act on behalf of his principal. The extent of his authority

is limited by the specific instructions under which he acts ;

and a third party in dealing with him is bound to ascertain

what the actual extent of that authority is, and the princi-

pal is not bound by any acts done outside the scope of it.

But it must be remembered that even if an agent is merely

employed to do a specific act, if he falls within one of those

classes of mercantile agents who have a certain authority

implied in law, such as a broker or factor, then, although

the principal may by specific instructions have modified that

authority, unless the third party has notice of such modifi-

cation, the principal will still be bound by all those acts of

his agent which are done within the scope of the authority

which such an agent ordinarily possesses.

But, of course, as between the principal and the agent,

both in the case of General and Special Agency, the question

whether the agent has exceeded his authority or not,

always depends upon what was the actual authority given

by the principal to his agent.

For the above rules, vide the following cases: —

Fenn v. Harrison (1790), 3 T. R. 757 ; here Buller, J.,

said ; " If a person be appointed a general agent, the

principal is bound by liis acts. But an agent constituted

for a particular purpose and under a limited and circum-

scrilted power cannot bind the principal by any act in

AUTHORITY OF AGENTS. 23

which he exceeds his authority ; for that would be to say

that one man may bind another without his consent."

Whitehead v. Tuckett (1812), 15 East. 400; here Lord

Ellenborough, C J., said ; " It may be material to consider

the distinction between a particular and a general authority :

the latter . of which does not import an unqualified au-

thority, but that which is derived from a multitude of