Johnson v. Corbett

Opinion by McSherry, C. J., ⁷⁴⁶ Do the several telegrams and letters set out in the record of this case evidence a contract for the sale by the appellee to the appellant of ten car loads of ear corn ? This is the only question to be considered. It is a narrow inquiry and its solution is not difficult. The appellant is a grain dealer in Richmond, Virginia.

The appellee is a dealer in hay in Washington County, Maryland, and occasionally purchases and ships corn. In the fall- of nineteen hundred and one the appellant made inquiry of the appellee by postal card in reference to the purchase of corn. That inquiry elicited a reply from the appellee in which he quoted “sound new ear corn at two dollars and forty cents ⁷⁴⁷ per bbl. for prompt acceptance and shipment.” Two days later the appellant wrote offering two dollars and thirty cents per bbl. for ten cars of sound ear corn in good condition. Four days afterwards, or on November the sixth, the appellee wrote stating. “I regret that cannot accept your offer for corn.” Clearly up to this point in the negotiations no agreement had been reached, and this the appellant himself admits, for on November the fifth he wrote, “Wire me immediately on receipt of this letter if you accepted my bid on ear corn.

I am offered a lot and I will buy if you won’t sell me.” The appellant had made an offer for a definite quantity of corn at a definite price and the appellee had distinctly declined to accept it. In so declining he rejected every term of the proposal, including the quantity and the price. Then on the ninth of November, after the appellee’s declension of November the sixth had been received by the appellant, the latter wrote: “Ifyou will not accept my offer why don’t you say what you will sell corn at. You know what you can buy it for and you can name a price on it.” This started a new inquiry.

It made no reference to quantity whatever and merely asked at what price the appellee would sell, not ten car loads of corn, but corn. It was a request for a quotation on corn, and in reply the appellee wrote on November the fourteenth : “the best price I can now name on good, sound, dry new corn is two dollars and sixty-five cents.” This was merely a quotation of the price, but was not an offer to sell any quantity at that price. Upon the