THE ACCEPTANCE AND RECEIPT. \) 



been no previous acceptance, his saying ' It is all right ' 

 would have had no effect; but when he had previously 

 examined and selected the sheep, it was for the Jury to 

 say whether he did not mean, ' These are the sheep which 

 I selected.' Suppose, in the case of a remarkable animal, 

 for instance, a Horse with peculiar spots, the vendee had 

 said, ' All right,' there could be no doubt he would mean 

 * This is the Horse I bought.'" [b). 



It is a question for the Jury whether there has been an Question for 

 acceptance and receipt. Thus W., living at Hereford, *^^*^ J^^'i"- 

 ordered goods (at a price above 10/.) of A., living at 

 Bristol, and directed that they should be sent by the 

 " Hereford " slooj) to Hereford. They were sent accord- 

 ingly, and a letter of advice was also sent to W., with an 

 invoice, stating the credit to be three months. On their 

 arrival at Hereford they were placed in the warehouse of 

 the owner of the sloop, where W. saw them ; and he then 

 said to the warehousemen that he would not take them, 

 but he made no communication to A. till the end of five 

 months, when he repudiated the goods. A. brought an 

 action against AV. for the price, and it was held that the 

 Judge ought not to have told the Jury that there was no 

 acceptance and actual receipt under the Statute of Frauds, 

 but should have left them to find, upon these facts, whether 

 or not there had been such acceptance and actual receipt (r). 



It has been stated above {d) that there may be an ac- Coustmctive 

 ceptance and receipt by the vendee before the goods are possession by 

 actually delivered by the vendor. Thus, after the de- 

 fendant had verbally agreed to jourchase of the plaintiff a 

 Horse, but before there had been any actual delivery 

 plaintiff requested defendant to lend it to him to take 

 certain journeys. To this the defendant assented, and the 

 Horse remained with plaintiff for a fortnight, when it was 

 sent to the defendant, who however refused to receive it : 

 the Jmy found that the bargain for the purchase of the 

 Horse was complete before the proposal to borrow it was 

 made, and that the defendant, as owner of the Horse, gave 

 plaintiff permission to keep it. It was thereupon held that 

 there was evidence of an acceptance and receipt of the 

 Horse to satisfy the Statute of Frauds (e). But the con^ 



(i) Ibid. 395. See also Sun- 160. See also BeDJamiu on Sales, 



monds v. Humble, 13 C. B., N. S. 2nd ed. 113. 



258. ((/) See ante, p. 8. 



(c) Bitshell V. Wheeler, 15 Q. B. [c) Marvin v. Wallace, 2 Jur., 



442 ; Jordan v. Norton, 4 M. & W. N. S. 689. 



