TENDEES 99 



plain that the signing of a written contract is an essential 

 part of their advertisement, if no contract is signed the 

 tenderer does not become bound. Thus, upon one occasion 

 the guardians of the poor of Kingston-upon-Hull advertised 

 for a butcher to supply their workhouse with meat, stipulating 

 that " all contractors would have to sign a written contract 

 after acceptance of the tender." The tender of one butcher 

 was accepted, but no contract was drawn up. In the mean- 

 time he wrote withdrawing his offer. It was held that the 

 acceptance did not form a binding contract so as to render 

 the butcher liable for refusing to supply meat to the guardians 

 upon the terms quoted by him. (Kingston-upon-Hull Guardians 

 v. Petch, 1854, 24 L. J. Ex. 23.) 



12. Damages for withdrawal of tender. Withdrawal of a 

 tender may involve the contractor in a claim for damages. In 

 another case, the defendant, finding that he had made a mistake 

 in his calculations, withdrew his tender, with the result that the 

 plaintiff had to employ another builder. He then sued the 

 defendant to recover the amount which he had to pay in 

 excess of the defendant's tender. It was held that he could 

 recover, inasmuch as there was a binding contract. (Lewis v. 

 Brass, 1877, L. K. 3 Q. B. D. 667.) 



13. The lowest tender. As a general rule, those who 

 advertise expressly state that they do not undertake to accept 

 the lowest or any tender ; but even when the advertisement is 

 silent on this point, there is no implied term in the request 

 for tenders that the lowest or highest, as the case may be 

 will be accepted. In an old case the defendants offered for 

 sale by tender the stock-in-trade of a certain firm, amounting 

 as per stock-book to 2,503, and which would be sold at a 

 discount in one lot. They also stated the day and the hour 

 when the tenders would be received and opened at their offices. 

 The plaintiffs made a tender, which they alleged was the 

 highest. In an action brought against the defendants for not 

 accepting such tender, it was decided that the circular was 

 only an invitation for offers, and that there was no implied 

 undertaking. (Spencer v. Harding, 1870, L. K. 5 C. P. 561.) 



But the custom of the trade may have a bearing on this 

 question. In Pauling v. Pontifex (1 W. K. 64) the plaintiff 

 sent to the defendants' agent a tender for the execution of 



H2 



