INSURANCE AGENT. An agent for ef fecting insurance may be such by appoint ment or the recognition of his acts done as such ; 2 Phill. Ins. § 1848; Perkins v. Ins. Co., 4 Cow. (N. Y.) 645. He may be agent for either of the parties to the policy, or for distinct purposes for both; People v. Imlay, 20 Barb. (N. Y.) 68.
An insurance agent's powers may be more or less extensive according to the express or implied stipulations and understandings be tween him and his principals. They may be for filling up and issuing policies signed in blank by his principals, for transmitting ap plications to his principals filled up by him self, as their agent or that of the applicant, for receiving and transmitting premiums, for adjusting and settling losses, or granting liberties and making new stipulations, or for any one or more of these purposes; First Baptist Church v. Ins. Co., 19 N. Y. 305 ; Bouton v. Ins. Co., 25 Conn, 542 ; Camphill v. Ins. Co., 37 N. H. 35, 72 Am. Dec. 324; Au gusta Insurance & Banking Co. of Georgia v. Abbott, 12 Md. 348; Howard Fire Ins. Co. v. Bruner, 23 Pa. 50; New York Union Mut. Ins. Co. v. Johnson, id. 72; East Texas Fire Ins. Co. v. Brown, 82 Tex. 631, 18 S. W. 713; Hahn v. Assurance Cq., 23' Or. 576, 32 Pac. 683, 37 Am. St. Rep. 709.
It is reasonable for insurance companies to insert in their policies conditions that their agents shall not have authority to alter the expressed terms of the policies ; North ern Assur. Co. v. Bldg. Ass'n, 183 U. S. 308, 22 Sup. Ct. 133, 46 L. Ed. 213; or to waive any stipulation therein unless endorsed on or added to the policy ; Gish v. Ins. Co., 16 Okla. 59, 87 Pac. 869, 13 L. R. A. (N. S.) 826. An agent cannot act so as to bind his com pany beyond the scope of his authority; Dem ing Inv. Co. v. Ins. Co., 16 Okla. 1, 83 Pac. 918, 4 L. R. A. (N. S.) 607; Northern Assur. Co. v. Bldg. Ass'n, 183 U. S. 308, 22 Sup. Ct. 133, 46 L. Ed. 213 ; contra, Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Schlink, 175 Ill. 284, 51 N. E. 795, where it was held the agent could waive a condition before delivery. A present contract of insurance is not affected by sign ing an application and the statement of an agent that he would take care of it and get a policy ; Whitman v. Ins. Co., 128 Wis. 124, 107 N. W. 291, 5 L. R. A. (N. S.) 407, 116 Am. St. Rep. 25.
A general agent is one who represents the insurer in the conduct of the business gen erally in a particular place or The powers of the general agent are thus stated by Dwight, Com., in Pitney v. Ins. Co., 65
N. Y. 6: "It is clear that a person author ized to accept risks, to agree upon and set tle the terms of insurance, and carry them into effect by issuing and renewing policies, must be regarded as the general agent of the company. (Post v. Ins. Co., 43 Barb. [N. Y.] 351.) The possession of blank policies and renewal receipts, signed by the president and secretary, is evidence of a general agency. (Carroll v. Ins. Co., 40 Barb. [N. Y.] 292.) The power of such an agent of a stock com pany is plenary as to the amount and nature of the risk, the rate of premium, and gener ally as to the terms and conditions, and he may make such memoranda and indorse ments, modifying the general provisions of the policy, and even inconsistent therewith, as in his discretion seems proper, before the policy is delivered, and in some cases even afterward. (May, Ins. 129.) He may also insert, by memorandum or indorsement, a description of the property inconsistent with the description of the same contained in the application, and such change will be effectual to protect the insured, although the policy it self provides that all conditions named in the application are to be fully complied with and that the application shall be a part of the policy, and a warranty on the part of the insured. (May, Ins. 129; Gloucester Mfg. Co. v. Ins. Co., 5 Gray [Mass.] 497, 66 Am. Dec. 376.)" An agent holding a commission from an insurance company authorizing him to take risks generally, without placing any limi tation thereon, either as to the kinds of risks or as to the territory within which they may be, is a general agent ; and the fact that the policy provides that, in any matter relating to the insurance, no person shall be deemed the agent of the company unless authorized in writing, and that the agent's commission states that he shall be subject to the rules of the company, and to such instructions as may be given him from time to time, do not impose on one dealing with the agent a duty to ascertain his au thority to issue a policy on a risk extrahaz ardous and located in a place other than the town in which is situated the agent's office ; German Fire Ins. Co. v. Tile Co., 15 Ind. App. 623, 43 N. E. 41.