delivered the opinion of the court.
*2813. Principal and agent, § 225*—burden of proving authority. One attempting to take advantage of the act of one claiming to be an agent has the burden of showing his authority.
Kuhn v. Pulaski County Mill & Elevator Co., 188 Ill. App. 279 (1914)
July 28, 1914
·
Illinois Appellate Court
188 Ill. App. 279
Paul Kuhn et al., trading as Paul Kuhn and Company, Appellants, v. Pulaski County Mill and Elevator Company, Appellee.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Pulaski county; the Hon. A. W. Lewis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1914.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed July 28, 1914.
*280Abstract of the Decision.
1. Principal and agent, § 105 * —when corporation not liable on contract of assumed agent. Where a corporation engaged in buying and selling grain leased its property to others who carried on the same kind of business and made a sale of a shipment of wheat through a correspondence in which they used the letter head of the corporation signed by one of them as agent, held in an action by the purchaser against the corporation to recover back an overpayment made, for the reason that wheat was not up to the grade agreed to be furnished, that the evidence was insufficient to show any liability on the part of the defendant, there being no evidence to show that the defendant authorized the sellers to use its name or had knowledge of its use until after the transaction and no proof of any act of omission or commission on the part of defendant to render it liable.
2. Principal and agent, § 237*—proof of agency. The mere showing that one assumed to act as agent is not sufficient to estab,-. lish an agency, nor can the agency be proved by an act of th§ *281supposed agent which was neither expressly nor impliedly authorized by the alleged principal.
*280Statement of the Case.
Action by Paul Kuhn and Elizabeth A. Kuhn, trading as Paul Kuhn and Company, against Pulaski County Mill and Elevator Company to recover a sum claimed to be due as an overcharge in a sale to plaintiffs of certain wheat which was not up to the grade contracted for. The suit was originally commenced before a justice of the peace where plaintiff had judgment for $176.10, but on appeal to the Circuit Court the cause was tried by the court with a jury and the issues were found for the defendant and judgment was entered against plaintiffs for costs. To reverse the judgment, plaintiffs appeal.
Feed Hood, for appellants.
Charles L. Rice, for appellee.