If a person proposes to sell another property, and the latter accepts "subject to the terms of a contract being arranged" between their solicitors, there is no agreement, for the acceptance is not final, but subject to a discussion to take place between the agents of the parties.68 If anything is left for future arrangement, the

Iowa, 560, 25 N. W. 778; Stagg v. Compton, 81 Ind. 171; Corser v. Hale, 149 Pa. 274, 24 Atl. 285; Wilkin Mfg. Co. v. Lumber Co., 94 Mich. 158, 53 N. W. 1045; Wristen v. Bowles, 82 Cal. 84, 22 Pac. 1136: Scott v. Davis, 141 Mo. 213, 42 S. W. 714; Coad v. Rogers, 115 Iowa, 478, 88 N. W. 947; Seymour v. Armstrong, 62 Kan. 720, 64 Pac. 612; Shady Hill Nursery Co. v. Waterer, 179 Mass. 318, 60 N. E. 789; Marschall v. Eisen Vineyard Co., 28 N. Y. Supp. 62, 7 Misc. Rep. 674; Strong & Trowbridge Co. v. H. Baars & Co., 60 Fla. 253, 54 South. 92. See, also, the cases cited in following notes.

As to acceptance by a person other than the one to whom the offer was made, see post. p.240 State v. Board of State Prison Com'rs, 37 Mont. 378, 96 Pac. 736; Gibney & Co. v. Arlington Brewery Co., 112 Va. 117, 70 S. E. 485. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 24; Cent. Dig. §§ 100-103.

65 Ante, p. 3.

66 Hough v. Brown, 19 N. Y. Ill; Briggs v. Sizer, 30 N. Y. 647; Borland v. Guffy, 1 Grant, Cas. (Pa.) 394; Harlow v. Curtis, 121 Mass. 320; Maclay v. Harvey, 90 111. 525, 32 Am. Rep. 35; Hammond v. Winchester, 82 Ala. 470, 2 South. 892; Crabtree v. Opera-House Co. (C. C.) 39 Fed. 746; Hubbell v. Palmer, 76 Mich. 441, 43 N. W. 442; Bristol Aerated Bread Co. v. Maggs, 44 Ch. Div. 616; Robertson v. Tapley, 48 Mo. App. 239; Crossley v. Maycock, 18 Eq. 180; Mygatt v. Tarbell, 85 Wis. 457, 55 N. W. 1031; Jones v. Daniel, [1894] 2 Ch. 332; Davenport v. Newton, 71 Vt 11, 42 Atl. 1087; Russell v. Manufacturing Co., 106 Wis. 329, 82 N. W. 134; Harris v. Scott, 67 N. H. 437, 32 Atl. 770; Putnam v. Grace, 161 Mass. 237, 37 N. E. 166.

If so accepted by the original proposer, it becomes a binding promise. Es-may v. Gorton, 18 111. 483. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 21,; Cent. Dig. §§ 100-108.

67 Minneapolis & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Mill Co., 119 U. S. 149, 7 Sup. Ct. 168, 30 L. Ed. 376; Hyde v. Wrench, 3 Beav. 334; Virginia Hot Springs Co. v. Harrison, 93 Va. 569, 25 S. E. 8SS; James v. Darby, 100 Fed. 224, 40 C. C. A. 341. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 21,; Cent. Dig. §§ 100-103.

68 Honeyman v. Marryat, 6 II. L. Cas. 112. It seems that an acceptance parties have not agreed.69 It is not to be understood from this that there must be nothing at all to be done after the acceptance. If the parties are fully agreed, there is a binding contract, notwithstanding the fact that a formal contract is to be prepared and signed;70 but the parties must intend the agreement to be binding. If, though fully agreed on the terms of their contract, they do not intend to be bound until a formal contract is prepared and signed, there is no contract, and the circumstance that the parties do intend a formal contract to be drawn up is strong evidence to show that-they did not intend the previous negotiations to amount to an agreement.71