16 



CONTRACTS CONCERNING HORSES, ETC. 



"Where no 

 price is agreed 

 upon. 



Contract by 

 letter. 



" Mr. Kingscote begs to inform Mr. Elmore, that if the 

 horse can be proved to be five years old, on the 13th of 

 this month, in a perfect satisfactory manner, of course he 

 shall be most happy to take him ; and if not most clearly 

 proved, Mr. K. will most decidedly not have him." Lord 

 Chief Justice Abbott was of opinion that this was_ not a 

 sufficient note or memorandum in writing within the 

 Statute of Frauds, and nonsuited the plaintiff. The 

 Court of King's I5ench confirmed the nonsuit, on the 

 ground that the price agreed to he paid constitutes a material 

 part of the bargain ; because if it were competent to a jDarty 

 to prove by parol evidence the price intended to be paid, it 

 would let in much of the mischief which it was the object 

 of the statute to prevent {p) ; but it has been held that a 

 written order for goods, "on moderate terms," is sufG.- 

 cient [q). 



If, however, no price is fixed and agreed upon, a note 

 or memorandum which does not state any will be sufficient, 

 and the law will infer that a reasonable price was to be 

 paid (r) ; on the principle that if I take up wares from a 

 tradesman, without any agreement as to price, the law 

 concludes that I contracted to pay their real value (s). 



The omission of the particular mode or time of payment 

 does not necessarily invalidate the agreement {t). 



A person who transacts a proposal by letter must be 

 considered as renewing his offer every moment, until the 

 time at which the answer is to be sent, and then the con- 

 tract is completed by the acceptance of the offer. For if 

 the law were otherwise, no contract could ever be com- 

 pleted by post (if). And if a letter be given in evidence 

 with the direction torn off, the jury will do well to presume 

 prima facie, that it was addressed to the person who pro- 

 duces it (x). 



Where an intending purchaser "wrote to the seller saying, 

 "If I hear no more about the horse, I consider the horse 

 is mine at 50/. 15s.," and the seller did not answer the 

 letter, the purchaser would have been bound to his offer, if 

 the seller had chosen to accept it ; but the fact of the seller 



[p] Elmore v. Kingscote, 5 B. & 

 C. 583. See also Taylor v. Smith, 

 [1893] 2 Q. B. 63 ; 61 L. J., Q. B. 

 331 ; 67 L. T., N. S. 39 ; 40 L. T. 

 486. 



(q) Ashcroft y. Morrin, 4 M. & 

 G. 460. 



(/■) Handley v. M'laine, 10 Bing. 



488. 



(s) 2 Bla. Com. 30. 



{t) Sari V. Bourdillon, 26 L. J.. 

 C. P. 78. 



(») Dunlop V. Siggins, 12 Jur. 

 295. 



(x) Curtis T. Siclcards, 1 M. & G. 

 47, per Tindal, C. J. 



