Where the principal makes a sale to a purchaser found by the broker, having availed himself of the broker's services, he is liable for the commission, although the sale is made at a lower price than that originally proposed by him to the broker. Crook v. Forst, 116 Ala. 395; 22 S. 540; Williams v. Bishop, 11 Colo. App. 378, 53 P. 239; Schegal v. Allerton, 65 Conn. 260, 32 A. 363; Baker v. Murphy, 105 I11. App. 151; Loehde v. Halsey, 88 I11. App. 452; McConaughty v. Mehannah, 28 I11. App. 169; Plant v. Thompson, 42 Kan. 664, 22 P. 726; Ratts v. Shepherd, 37 Kan. 20, 14 P. 496; Hubachek v. Haz-zard, 83 Minn. 437, 86 N. W. 426; McCormack v. Henderson, 100 Mo. App. 647, 75 S. W. 171; Stinde v. Bleach, 42 Mo. App. 578; Wetzel v. Wagoner, 41 Mo. App. 509; Martin v. Silliman, 53 N. Y. 615; Martin v. Fegan, 88 N. Y. S. 472, 95 App. Div. 154; Levy v. Coogan, 16 Daly, 137, 9 N. Y. S. 534; Chilton v. Butler, 1 E. D. Smith (N. Y.), 150; Hobbs v. Edgar, 51 N. Y. S. 1120, 23 Misc. 618; Gold v. Serrill, 26 N. Y. S. 5, 6 Misc. 124; Steinfeld v. Strom, 63 N. Y. S. 966, 31 Misc. 167;' Keys v. Johnson, 68 Pa. St. 42; Oliver v. Katz, 131 Wis. 409, 111 N. W. 509; Byrd v. Frost (Tex. Civ. App. '94), 29 S. W. 46; Barnes v. German Sav., etc., Soc., 21 Wash. 448, 58 P. 569; Holland v. Vinson, 124 Mo. App. 417, 101 S. W. 1131. Unless the right to a commission is made conditional upon a sale being effected at the price fixed in the broker's authority. Armes v. Cameron, 19 D. C. 435; Buhl v. Noe, 51 I11. App. 622; Schwartze v. Yearly, 31 Md. 270; Child v. Ptomey, 17 Mont. 502, 43 P. 714; Briggs v. Rowe,

1 Abb. Dec. (N. Y.), 189, 4 Keyes, 424; Steinfeld v. Storm, 63 N. Y. S. 966, 31 Misc. 167; Sargent v. Story (Tex. Civ. App. '01), 61 S. W. 977; McArthur v. Slosson, 53 Wis. 41, 9 N. W. 781. See also Sec. 133.

A broker who has the exclusive right for sixty days to sell at a fixed price certain real estate, can not bind his principal by a contract in which the time for the completion of the purchase and the payment of the price is extended thirty days after the expiration of the sixty days. Smith v. Mc-Cann, 205 Pa. 57, 54 A. 498. See Sec. 14 for time beyond the limit allowed to examine the title.