254 THE ADVENTURES OF A GENTLEMAN 



The acceiJtance of goods by the buyer must be 

 clear and unequivocal ; and a constructive acceptance 

 will not be sufficient, (See Nicholle v. Plume, 1 Car- 

 rington and Payne, 272.) And in another case of 

 Tempest v. Fitzgerald, 3 Barnwell and Alderson, 

 680, the necessity of a clear acceptance seems yet 

 more decidedly laid down. A agreed to purchase a 

 horse from B for ready money, and to fetch him 

 away on a given day. Two days before that day, 

 A rode the horse, and gave directions as to his 

 exercise and future treatment; but requested that 

 he might remain in B's possession for a further time, 

 at the expiration of which he promised to fetch him 

 away and pay the price ; the horse died before A 

 paid the price, or took him away ; it was held that 

 there was no acceptance of the horse, so as to make 

 the bargain executed within the meaning of the 

 statute. 



A delivery to a party named by the purchaser is 

 a delivery within the statute ; and so is a delivery, 

 without special directions, to a carrier, where the 

 purchaser has been in the habit of receiving goods 

 from the vendor by a similar conveyance, vide Hart 

 V. Sattley, 3 Campbell, 528; and it would appear 



