Plaintiff sues defendant for commissions alleged to be due him as selling agent of a certain plantation. Defendant resists, on the ground that the sending forward by himself of a power of attorney to plaintiff was a mere "offer" of an agency, and that before it was accepted he withdrew his lands from the market; that in the power of attorney sent forward it was agreed and understood that no sale could or should be made until after the prospective buyer had a conference with him and had satisfied him as to his financial ability, and that he himself should be present at the sale to receive the cash and notes; that when the prospective purchaser in this instance (with whom plaintiff as agent had entered into a written promise of sale of the land), presented himself at Natchez, he did not put him (defendant) in default for non-execution of the promise: Held, the defenses urged are not well founded. The sending forward of the power of attorney was not the initial step in the matter of agency. It was in fact accepted by plaintiff's offer to take the agency. If an acceptance was necessary it was accepted by letter and by action within the time that the situation of the parties and the nature of the contract showed it was the intention of the defendant to allow. The notice of the withdrawal of the land from market was a recognition of the pre-existing agency of the plaintiff. This withdrawal was after the plaintiff and the prospective buyer had started to meet defendant at Natchez, and there was no necessity for putting the defendant in default; he had himself put an end to the agency, and had placed it out of his power to carry out the promise of sale; he had withdrawn from the prospective purchaser an opportunity to show his good faith and ability to purchase. Lucket Land & E. Co. v. Brown, 118 La. 943, 43 S. 628.