Upon acceptance the offer becomes an agreement, enforceable if otherwise valid,1 which can not thereafter be withdrawn by the offeror.2 If an offer to furnish labor or material or both is accepted, an express

7 Pfiester v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co, 85 Kan. 97, 116 Ac. 245.

8 Pfiester v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co., 85 Kan. 97, 116 Ac. 245.

9 Mowat v. Provident Savings Assurance Society, 27 Ont. App. 675.

10 See ch. LXXXIV.

1 Tinn v. Hoffman, 20 L. T. (N.S.) 271; Ratterman v. Campbell (Ky.J, 80 S. W. 1155.

2 Tinn v. Hoffman, 20 L. T. (N.S.) 271; Ratterman v. Campbell (Ky.), 80 S. W. 1155.

1 United States. Andrews v. Schrei-ber, 93 Fed. 367.

Alabama. Sturdivant v. Mt. Dixie Sanitarium, Land & Investment Co., 197 Ala. 280, 72 So. 502; Martin v. Powell, - Ala. - , 75 So. 358.

California. Remsberg v. Hackney Manufacturing Co., 174 Cal. 799, 164 Ac. 792.

Connecticut. Peck v. Edwards, 90 Conn. 669, 98 Atl. 325.

District of Columbia. N. M. Minnix Co. v. L. C. Smith & Bros. Typewriter Co., 33 D. C. App. 357.

Florida. Peters v. E. 0. Painter Fertilizer Co., - Fla. - , 75 So. 749.

Illinois. Summers v. Hibbard, 153 111. 102, 46 Am. St. Rep. 872, 38 N. E. 899; Carter v. Love, 206 111. 310, 69 N. E. 85; Rockford v. Mead, 207 111. 423, 69 N. E. 756.

Iowa. Ft. Madison v. Moore, 109 la. 476, 80 N. W. 527.

Kansas. Chadsey v. Condley, 62 Kan. 853. 62 Ac. 663; Nieschburg v. Nothern, 101 Kan. 110, 165 Ac. 857.

Kentucky. Murphy v. Reed, 125 Ky. 585, 128 Am. St. Rep. 259, 10 L. R. A. (N.S.) 195, 101 S. W. 964.

Massachusetts. Buffington v. Mc-Nally, 192 Mass. 198, 78 N. E. 309; Cavanaugh v. D. W. Ranlet Co., 229 Mass. 366, 118 N. E. 650.

Minnesota. Hayden v. Bryon, 78 Minn. 27, 80 N. W. 835.

Mississippi. Couret v. Conner, 118 Miss. 598, 79 So. 230.

North Carolina. Billings v. Wilby, 175 N. Car. 571, 96 S. E. 50.

North Dakota. Kvale v. Keane, - N. D. - , 168 N. W. 74.

Ohio. Wiedemann Brewing Co. v. Maxwell, 78 O. S. 54, 84 N. E. 595.

Rhode Island. Beggs v. James Hanley Brewing Co., 27 R. I. 385, 114 Am. St. Rep. 44, 62 Atl. 373.

Utah. Schwab Safe & Lock Co. v. Snow, 44 Utah 341, 140 Ac. 761.

Vermont. Patton v. Cardiner, 72 Vt. 47, 47 Atl. 110.

Virginia. Mercer v. South Atlantic Life Ins. Co., 111 Va. 699, 69 S. E. 961.

Washington. Edwards v. Thompson, 99 Wash. 188, 169 Ac. 327.

West Virginia. Ladies Tailoring Co. v. Brown, 76 W. Va. 725, 86 S. E. 767.

Wyoming. Frank v. Stratford-Hand-cock, 13 Wyom. 37, 110 Am. St. Rep. 963, 67 L. R. A. 571, 77 Ac. 134.

2 District of Columbia. Stern v. Moneyweight Scale Co., 42 D. C. App. 162.

Georgia. Prior v. Hilton & Dodge Lumber Co., 141 Ga. 117, 80 S. E. 559.

Indian Territory. Doherty v. Arkansas & O. R. Co., 5 Ind. Ter. 537, 82 S. W. 899 [reversed, Doherty v. Arkansas & O. R. Co., 142 Fed. 104, on the ground that the evidence did not show an acceptance].

Kansas. Mills v. Osawatomie, 59 Kan. 463, 53 Ac. 470 [reversing in part, Osawatomie v. Mills, 4 Kan. App. 299, 45 Ac. 937].

Massachusetts. Cary Library v. Bliss, 151 Mass. 364, 7 L. R. A. 765, 25 N. E. 92.

Michigan. Agar v. Streeter, 183 Mich. 600, 150 N. W. 160.

North Carolina. Billings v. Wilby, 175 N. Car. 571, 96 S. E. 50.

Montana. Walsh v. School District, 17 Mont. 413, 43 Ac. 180.

New York. Pettibone v. Moore, 75 Hun, 461.

Texas. Short v. Threadgill, 3 Tex. App. Civ. Cas., Sec. 267, p. 324.

Wisconsin. New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. Simon, 104 Wis. 120, 80 N. W. 71; Agnew v. Baldwin, 136 Wis. 263, 116 N. W. 641.

Wyoming. Frank v. Stratford-Hand-cock, 13 Wyom. 37, 110 Am. St. Rep. 963, 67 L. R. A. 571, 77 Ac. 134.

contract exists which measures the rights of the parties and which excludes an implied contract.3 If an offer has been accepted, a contract exists, although one of the parties declares that he is unable to determine whether a contract has been made or not.4 A gratuitous option to purchase land is enforcible specifically if it is accepted before it lapses or is revoked.5 If, the original offer was subject to a condition, the acceptance of such offer and the happening of such condition complete the contract.6 If a contract for lighting streets is contained in a city ordinance, it can not after acceptance, be ended by repealing the ordinance.7 If an offer has been accepted, such offer is not rendered invalid by subsequent negotiations between the parties upon other questions involved in such transaction unless there is a subsequent offer and acceptance.8 Now terms can not be inserted after acceptance without the consent of both parties.9 Thus an attorney who offered to try a case for a school board for a certain sum can not after informal acceptance and after the trial of the case withdraw his offer and recover a larger sum on the ground that he had no binding contract with the board.10 "When the offer has been accepted the contract is completed; and the subsequent attempt of one of the parties to procure modifications in such contract can not abrogate it.11 A written contract for through transportation is not affected by a bill of lading delivered after the goods are shipped, providing that liability should end with the line of the initial carrier.12 The acceptance of money tendered in full payment of a disputed claim is an acceptance of such offer; and after such acceptance of such money, the creditor can not treat this as a part payment and recover the balance of the original claim.13 An offer of a part of a disputed claim as a part payment, leaving the true amount to be determined later, can not thereafter, upon acceptance, be treated by the debtor as an offer of. compromise.14

3 Beggs v. James Hanley Brewing Co., 27 R. I. 385, 114 Am. St. Rep. 44, 62 Atl. 373.

4 0zzola v. Musolino, 225 Mass. 512, 114 N. E. 733.

5 Carter v. Love, 206 111. 310, 69 N. E. 85.

6 Lansing Co. v. Rogers, 183 Mich. 334, 149 N. W. 1000.

7 Mills v. Osawatomie, 59 Kan. 463, 53 Ac. 470 [reversing in part, 4 Kan. App. 299, 45 Ac. 937].

8 Perry v. Suffields, Lira. (1916), 2 Ch. 187.

9 Perry v. Suffields, Lim. (1916), 2 Ch. 187; Southern Ry. Co. v. Huntsville Lumber Co., 191 Ala. 333, 67 So. 695; American Lighting Co. v. McCuen, 92 Md. 703, 48 Atl. 352; Agnew v. Baldwin, 136 Wis. 263, 116 N. W. 641.

10 Walsh v. School District, 17 Mont. 413. 43 Ac. 180.

11 Beach & Clarridge Co. v. American Steam Gauge & Valve Mfg. Co., 208 Mass. 121, 94 N. E. 457.

12 Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. American Trading Co., 195 U. S. 439, 49 L. ed. 269, 25 S. Ct. 84.

13 Iowa. Sparks v. Mfg. Co., 158 la. 491, 139 N. W. 1083.

Maine. Chapin v. Little Blue School, 110 Me. 415, 86 Atl. 838.

While one party can not revoke an offer after acceptance, both parties may waive the contract by mutual agreement.15 If one party demands that new terms be added and the adversary party treats the negotiations as once more open, the contract into which the parties have entered is waived.16 An oral agreement may be waived by the act of one party in inserting new terms when reducing such contract to writing and by the act of the adversary party in refusing to enter into such contract for financial reasons.17

If the parties have already entered into a valid oral contract, it is not necessary to accept a subsequent written offer which repeats the oral offer which has been accepted already,18 since subsequent unaccepted offers can not affect the validity of such prior contract If a valid contract has been made orally, and subsequently one of the parties thereto puts his proposition in writing in the form of a letter, it is not necessary that such proposition in writing should be accepted.19

If an offer in writing is accepted orally, and subsequently is accepted in writing, the offeror may rely on either acceptance.20 If the written acceptance is insufficient, as not conforming to the offer, the offeror may then rely on the oral acceptance.21 If an oral contract has been made between A and B, and A has already performed, a written contract signed by B can be enforced, although A was unconscious when B signed such contract.22 If the offer is accepted as a finality it is a contract even if it purports to be an "order."23

Massachusetts. Worcester Color Co. v. Henry Wood's Sons Co., 209 Mass. 105, 95 N. E. 392.

North Carolina. Aydlett v. Brown, 153 N. Car. 334, 69 S. E. 243.

Ohio. Seeds Hay & Grain Co. v. Conger, 83 O. S. 169, 32 L. R. A. (N.S.) 380, 93 N. E. 892.

Pennsylvania. Societe Anonyme pour la Fabrication de la Soie de Chardonnet v. Loeb, 239 Pa. St. 264, 86 Atl. 798.

14 J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. Fisher, 144 la. 45, 122 N. W. 575; Bryant Lumber Co. v. Coppock-Warner Lumber Co., 164 N. Car. 359, 79 S. E. 282; Seattle R. & S. Ry. Co. v. Seattle-Tacoma Power Co., 63 Wash. 639, 116 Ac. 289; O'Connell v. Arai, 63 Wash. 280, 115 Ac. 95.

15 See Sec. 546, and ch. LXXV.

16 Philadelphia Mortgage & Trust Co. v. Hardesty, 68 Kan. 683, 75 Ac. 1115.

17 Cincinnati Equipment Co. v. Big Muddy River Consolidated Coal Co., 158 Ky. 247, 164 S. W. 794.

18 Fearnley v. Fearnley, 44 Colo. 417, 98 Ac. 819; Sawyer v. Walker, 204 Mo. 133, 102 S. W. 544.

19 Sawyer v. Walker, 204 Mo. 133, 102 S. W. 544.

20 Beach & Clarridge Co. v. Mfg. Co., 202 Mass. 177, 88 N. E. 924; Metropolitan Coal Co. v. Boutell Transportation & Towing Co., 196 Mass. 72, 81 N. E. 645.

21 Metropolitan Coal Co. v. Boutell Transportation & Towing Co., 196 Mass, 72, 81 N. E. 645.