IN SEARCH OF A HORSE. 253 



the hind seat should be put on ; this Tvas done in 

 her presence, and agreeably to her directions. The 

 afternoon proving wet, the defendant came again 

 to the plaintiffs at five o'clock, and said that she 

 should not take the carriage home that evening ; 

 she afterwards refused to pay the price demanded, 

 and did not remove the carriage. It was held 

 that this constituted a sufficient delivery and accept- 

 ance. 



With respect to the sufficiency of a delivery of 

 part, to take the case out of the statute, there is 

 another case which ought to be noticed in con- 

 nection with Hodgson v. Le Bret. It is the case of 

 Thompson v. Macirone, 4 D. and R., 619. "Where 

 goods to the value of £144 were made pursuant to 

 order, but continued by desire of the vendee upon 

 the premises of the vendor, excepting a part to the 

 value of X2 10s., which the former took away; held 

 that there was no delivery and acceptance of the 

 goods, within the meaning of the 17th section of the 

 statute." 



Here, however, I collect that the bargain was not 

 one and entire, but for the part removed as distinct 

 and separate from the bulk. , 



99^ 



