REPOSITOEIES AND AUCTIONS. 47 



goods lost above tlie value of 5/., unless entered as such, 

 the ijostiug up of a bill in the coach office to that effect 

 has been held to be sufficient. I therefore think the 

 same mode being adopted here gives the same degree of 

 notice to all persons who come to this sale, and that it 

 is a sufficient notice of the conditions under which the 

 Horses are sold." " With respect to the main point, 

 when parties enter into a special agreement, they must 

 adhere to the terms of it. Here there is a condition that 

 the party purchasing must return the Plorse within two 

 days, which he has not done; I therefore think the plaintiff 

 must be nonsuited" {>•). 



But when property is sold in lots described in particulars Notice of 

 of sale, a vendee is only affected with notice of what Particulars, 

 concerns the lots which he purchases, and is not to be 

 taken as having read all the particulars of all the lots (s). 



A Bidder at an auction under the usual conditions that Where a 

 the highest bidder shall be the purchaser, may retract his ^^'Wer may- 

 bidding before the hammer is down ; because the Auc- 

 tioneer is the agent of the vendor, and the assent of both 

 parties is necessary to make the contract binding, and 

 that is signified on the part of the seller by knocking 

 down the hammer. Every bidding is nothing more than 

 an offer on one side, which is not binding on either side till 

 it is assented to (/) . 



Where a Horse is to be sold "without reserve," and Sale"with- 

 the vendor buys it, the highest bo)id fide bidder is entitled °"* reserve." 

 to recover damages from the Auctioneer. In the case of 

 Warlow V. Harrison {u), the sale was stated to be "with- 

 out reserve," and one of the printed conditions was, 

 " any lot ordered for this sale, and sold by private con- 

 tract by the owner or advertiser 'without reserve,' fnid 

 bought by the owner, to be liable to the usual commission 

 of 5/. per cent." There was also the usual condition that 

 the highest bidder should be the buyer. After a bond fide 

 bid by a third person, the owner advanced on the bidding, 

 and the lot was knocked down to him. The Court of 

 Queen's Bench held that the owner could not claim the lot 

 as sold to the Auctioneer, against whom the action was 

 brought, and that they were not called upon to say whether 



{r) Mesnard v. AUrldge, 3 Esi^. {t) Payne v. Cave, 3 T. R. 148 ; 



271. and see Roullcdgc v. Grant, 4 Bing. 



(s) Curtis V. Thomas, 33 L. T., C53 ; Head v. 'Biggon, 3 M. & R. 

 N. S. 664, V.-C. II. 97. 



(m) 29 L. J., Q. B. 14. 



