DEFINITION OF DIRECTLY. 493 



In Leigh v. Palerson the defendant contracted to deliver tallow to the 

 plaintiif " in ^(// next December" at 62s. per cwt. The defendants in 

 October tried to compromise and be off their bargain (as they had sold 

 the tallow for 71s.), but the plaintiff insisted on holding them to it, and 

 the Court considered that tallow having risen in price, the plaintiff was 

 entitled to recover damages according to the market price (81s.) on the 

 last day on which the contract would have been performed, namely, the 

 31st of December, as he had not acquiesced in its being rescinded when 

 the defendants refused to perform it, — and not according to the (71s.) 

 October price. And in Startu]) v. Cortazzi, which was a case of delivery 

 of Odessa linseed (100 chetwerts = 73 quarters), payment of the differ- 

 ence between the contract price (3Gs. per quarter) and the value of the 

 linseed (48s.) at the time when the cargo ought to have been delivered 

 in due course, was that to which the plaintiffs were entitled. The de- 

 fendant had paid 47s. into Court, being the price at the time of the 

 notice of non-completion. It had risen to 56s., at the time of the trial, 

 and the plaintiff contended that the damages should be calculated ac- 

 cording to that price ; but 2)er Lord Abinger C.B. this was not a case 

 resembling contracts for the replacing of stock, where the damages are 

 estimated at the price of the funds. 



A contract to be performed " direct! g" means to be performed not 

 " within a reasonable time," but " sjjeedilg,''' or at least " as earlg as 

 practicable." Thus, in Duncan v. Tujjhani, on February 18 the plaintiff 

 wrote to the defendant, oflFering to supply him with linseed cake at 

 £10 15s. per ton, and on the 19th the defendant replied, "I can take 

 5 tons at £10 10s., but it must be put on board directlg." On the 22nd 

 the plaintiff' again wrote : " I shall ship you 5 tons best cakes to-viorroiv ; " 

 and it was held by the Court of Common Pleas that the correspondence 

 did not prove a contract on the part of the defendant to accept cake 

 " to be delivered within a reasonable time," and a new trial was ordered, 

 after a verdict for the plaintiff. Gresswell J. said : " It is true, as it 

 appears from Tliompson v. Gil)son, that ' directly ' does not mean instanier, 

 and it may be subject to a similar limitation here ; but the expression 

 * within a reasonable time,' certainly is larger than is warranted by the 

 terms of the contract." And^j^r Curiam, a contract is complete upon the 

 p)0sting by one partg of a letter addressed to the other accepting the terms 

 offered by the latter, notwithstanding such letter never reaches its destina- 

 tion. A contract by a manufacturer to furnish certain specified goods 

 " as soon as possible," means within a reasonable time, regard being had 

 to the manufacturer's ability to produce them, and the orders he may 

 already have in hand {Atttvood v. Emery). 



Where by a written contract the plaintiffs agreed with the defendant 



