Suppose Mr. Lord, as agent of “the Contributionship Insurance Company,” had drawn a bill in favor of the plaintiff upon a third person, he would have signed the name of “ the Contributionship Insurance Company, by W. C. Lord, agenthis name being put on the paper merely to show that he had signed the name of the company, and assumed authority to do so. Suppose the drawee had accepted the bill and paid it in part, it is clear that the company would have been liable as na-afeer, due notice being given, but no one would imagine that "W. C. Lord was in any way liable. The principle applicable to our case is precisely the same, and the facts are the same, with this difference, “ the Contributionship Insurance Company,” instead of drawing upon a third person, is the drawer of a bill upon itself.

This is an anomaly unknown to the “ law merchant.” A eheck payable to self, or to one’s own order, is in common use, and perhaps this suggested the idea of a Mil upon self; but however that may be, it is clear that the agent who drew the bill, the agency being admitted, is in no way liable. There is no error.

Judgment affirmed.