TORTS AND CRIME. Strictly all torts com mitted by the agents of a corporation while act ing for the corporation are ultra rites, since a corporation has no express or implied authority to commit tortious nets. Following this course of reasoning, the early tendency of the courts was to hold that corporations could not be held legally responsible for torts. Governed, how ever. by considerations of policy, the courts hold that corporations are liable for all torts of their agents and employees committed by them within the scope of their authority. When malice is an essential element in the tort, the malice of the agent is imputed to the corporate principal. Up on similar principles corporations have general ly been held responsible for minor criminal offenses. and in many States there are now spe cial statutes governing the criminal responsi bility of corporations. See LAW, CRIMINAL.
Courts of equity trill take jurisdiction to re strain ultra-vires acts at the suit of a stock holder upon his showing that the directors or trustees of the corporation refuse to act. There is also statutory authority in some States for proceedings brought in behalf of the State by the Attorney-General to restrain ultra-rircs acts when they arc working a public injury, and at common law the State may proceed on the rela tion of a private individual to compel forfeiture of the charter of a corporation by quo war ran to (q.v.) on the ground that the corporation is committing ultra-vires acts under such cir cumstances as to amount to a departure from the business or purposes for which it was organ ized. Consult the authorities referred to under CORPORATION; CRIMINAL LAW; EQUITY; QUASI CONTRACT.