COMMERCIAL TRAVELLER. A travel ling salesman who simply exhibits samples of goods kept for sale by his principal, and takes orders from purchasers for such goods, which goods are afterwards to be delivered by the principal to the purchasers, and pay ment for the goods is to be made by the pur chaser to the principal on such delivery. City of Kansas v. Collins, 34 Kan. 436, 8 Pac. 865 ; State v. Miller, 93 N. C. 511, 53 Am. Rep. 469. An order solicited by and given to such salesman does not constitute a sale, either absolute or conditional, of the goods ordered, but is a mere proposal, to be accepted or not, as the principal may see fit; McKindly v. Dunham, 55 Wis. 515, 13 N. W. 485, 42 Am. Rep. 740; Clark v. Smith, 88 Ill. 298.
An agent who sells by sample and on cred it, and is not intrusted with the possession of the goods to be sold, has no implied au thority to receive payment, and payment to him will not discharge the purchaser; But ler v. Dorman, 68 Mo. 302, 30 Am. Rep. 795; Law v. Stokes, 32 N. J. L. 250, 90 Am. Dec. 655 ; Seiple v. Irwin, 30 Pa. 513 ; Kornemann v. Monaghan, 24 Mich. 36.
Even if be has power to collect accounts, receiving checks payable to his principal, no authority to endorse such checks will be Im plied; Jackson v. Bank, 92 Tenn. 154, 20 S.
W. 802, 18 L. R. A. 663, 36 Am. St. Rep. 81; nor authority to bind his principals on a contract for advertising his business in a newspaper ; Tarpey v. Bernheimer, 16 N. Y. Supp. 870.
It has been held that possession of the goods by a commercial traveller who sells them is evidence of authority to collect there for ; Bailey v. Pardridge, 134 Ill. 188, 27 N. E. 89 ; John Hutchinson Mfg. Co. v. Henry, 44 Mo. App. 263; Cross v. Haskins, 13 Vt. 536.
Where a drummer sold his samples and converted the proceeds, it was held, in the absence of evidence of the custom or usage of the drummer's disposition of samples, that the principals were not bound by the sale; Kohn v. Washer, 64 Tex. 131, 53 AM. Rep. 745 ; but where such sale is ratified, the payment to the agent is ratified also; Bailey v. Pardridge, 134 Ill. 188, 27 N.' E. 89.
The drummer may hire a carriage upon the credit of his principals if necessary; Bentley v. Doggett, 51 Wis. 224, 8 N. W. 155, 37 Am. Rep. 827; Huntley v. Mathias, 90 N. C. 101, 47 Am. Rep. 516, where the princi pals were held liable for the drummer's tort in overdriving a horse.