116 THE LAW AFFECTING ENGINEEKS 



5. How the specification becomes part of the contract. As a 

 general rule the contract between employer and contractor 

 expressly refers to and incorporates the specification as part 

 of it. But it requires no great formality to bring about this 

 result. So if a man engages to do certain work in conformity 

 to drawings and a specification, the offer incorporates the 

 drawings and the specification, and if the specification men- 

 tions a time for completion, and the offer is accepted, comple- 

 tion within the time referred to in the specification is a part 

 of the contract. In Wimshurst v. Deely, 1845, 2 C. B. 253, 

 the defendants had been applied to by the plaintiff to make 

 for him an engine and boilers for a steamship, the engine to 

 be constructed upon a new principle patented by a Mr. Barrie, 

 and to be made according to certain drawings and a specifica- 

 tion produced by Barrie. The specification contained a 

 condition that the engine, boilers, etc., should be completed 

 and delivered within two months. The defendants offered to 

 supply the engine " in conformity to the drawings and 

 specification " (in which the time was mentioned), the engine 

 "to be got up under the superintendence of Mr. Barrie, 

 and when approved by him at the works, to be delivered by 

 us at the East India Docks." This offer was accepted. There 

 was a six months' delay in delivery, in respect of which the 

 plaintiff claimed damages. In giving judgment, Tindal, C. J., 

 said : " The fair interpretation of the contract the offer on 

 the one side, and the acceptance on the other appears to me 

 to be, that the engine and boilers should be completed and 

 delivered within two months. Time might have been a 

 most important consideration for the plaintiff. Without the 

 machinery the vessel would be useless, and the plaintiff may 

 have entered into engagements from which he could not recede." 

 The plaintiff, therefore, was awarded damages. Where the 

 drawings and the specification both form part of the contract, 

 it is well to provide that, in case of a discrepancy, the specifica- 

 tion shall prevail. (See, e.g., Form IIA., Cl. 11 (a), post.) 



A mere tender and a specification may form a contract 

 (Allen v. Yoxall, 1844, 1 C. & K. 315). 



6. Works omitted from specification not necessarily extras. 

 It follows as a necessary consequence of the principles above 

 stated, that works omitted from a specification are not neces- 

 sarily extras ; for if the contractor undertake to carry out 



