This rule has been followed in many cases, and we think it is not open to serious question. Lauderdale County v. City of Memphis, 167 Tenn. 493, 71 S.W.2d 686; Warters v. Boswell, 152 Tenn. 476, 279 S.W. 793; Henry v. Henry, 73 Neb. 746, 103 N.W. 441, 107 N.W. 789; Scheiber v. Von Arx, 87 Minn. 298, 92 N.W. 3. The complaint in the present action shows that it was drawn by a pleader who had full knowledge of the rule of law just stated, and it is apparent that he has endeavored to bring it within the rule.
And, as pointed out by the chancellor in his opinion, there is no averment or proof that the hospital authorities were without full knowledge of all the attendant circumstances when they rendered the service for which the city of Memphis claims compensation. In these circumstances, absence of liability on the part of the sheriff and county physician is clearly ruled by our case of Warters v. Boswell, 152 Tenn. 476, 482, 279 S.W. 793, 794, wherein we said: "We think without a doubt it is a general rule that, when public agents, in good faith, contract with parties having full knowledge of the extent of their authority, or who have equal means of knowledge with themselves, they do not become individually liable unless the intent to incur personal responsibility is clearly expressed, although it should be found that, through ignorance of the law, they have exceeded their authority."