If a contract for the sale of personalty, executory on the part of the vendor, is broken by the vendor, the measure of damages is the market price of such property less the contract price.1 The market price for this purpose must be determined as of the time and place of the delivery agreed upon.2 If

5 Ashland, etc., Co. v. Shores, 105 Wis. 122; 81 N. W. 136.

1 Cornell v. Rodabaugh, 117 la. 287; 94 Am. St. Rep. 298; 90 N. W. 599; Yokora v. McBride. 56 la. 139; 8 N. W. 795; Kirkpatrick v. Downing, 58 Mo. 32; 17 Am. Rep. 678; Muenehow v. Roberts, 77 Wis. 520; 46 N. W. 802; Hall v. Delaplaine, 5 Wis. 206; 68 Am. Dee. 57.

2 Gerbert v. Trustees, 59 N. J. L. 160; 59 Am. St. Rep. 578; 35 Atl. 1121.

3 Ehrich v. Durkee, - Colo. App. -, 72 Pae. 814; Gray v. Meek, 199 111. 136; 64 N. E. 1020; affirming 101 111. App. 463.

1 Crug v. Gorham. 74 Conn. 541; 51 Atl. 519; Rahm v. Deig, 121 Ind. 283; 23 N. E. 141; Welch v. Urbany, 112 la. 531; 84 N. W. 497; Asher v. Stacy (Ky.), 65 S. W. 603; Williams v. Bienvenue, 109 La. 1023; 34 So. 63; Bartlett v. Blanch-ard, 13 Gray (Mass.) 429; Coxe v. Power Co., 87 Minn. 56; 91 N. W. 265; Stone v. Mfg. Co., 65 N. J. L. 20; 46 Atl. 696; Talbot v. Boyd. 11 N. D. 81; 88 N. W. 1026; Smith v. Lime Co., 57 O. S. 518; 49 N. E. 695; Kinports v. Breon, 193 Pa. St. 309; 44 Atl. 436; Harris v. Rodgers, 6 Heisk. (Tenn.) 626.

2 Michael v. Hart (1902), 1 K. B. 482; Cummings v. Dudley, 60 Cal. 383; 44 Am. Rep. 58; Murray v. Doud, 167 111. 368; 59 Am. St. Rep. 297; 47 N. E. 717; Fink v. Tatman. 36 Ind. 259; 10 Am. Rep. 19; Cole v. Ross. 9 B. Mon. (Ky.) 393; 50 delivery has been postponed by mutual consent, the time fixed by the last postponement is the time at which damages should be estimated.3 If there is no market at the place of delivery but there is one within a reasonable distance, the market price at such market with the cost of transportation must be taken as the measure of damages.4 The value of a note whose sale is contracted for is its selling price and not its face, within the meaning of this rule.5 If a higher price must be paid in open market for buying on short notice, this must be considered in determining damages.6 If a contract to sell at private sale is broken by a sale at auction, the measure of damages is the difference between the price obtained and the price that would have been obtained by a sale under the contract.7 Ordinarily, the loss of profits which the vendee would have made on a contemplated resale cannot be recovered.8 This rule is said to exist where the vendor does not know of such intended resale.9 If, however, the supply of the article contracted for is limited so that it cannot be bought in open market and has no market price, a different rule must apply. The cost of getting the article less the contract price has been said to be the measure of damages.10 If failure to get such article stops the vendee's business it has been said that he may recover the profits which he otherwise would have made.11 So the profits of a possible resale have been allowed in such cases.12

Am. Dec. 517; McGrath v. Gegner, 77 Md. 331; 39 Am. St. Rep. 415; 26 Atl. 502; Austrian v. Springer, 94 Mich. 343; 34 Am. St. Rep. 350; 54 N. W. 50; Cahen v. Piatt, 69 N. Y. 348; 25 Am. Rep. 203.

3 Summers v. Hibbard, 153 111. 102; 46 Am. St. Rep. 872; 38 N. E. 899.

4 Coxe v. Power Co., 87 Minn. 56; 91 N. W. 265.

5 Kory v. Layman, 108 La. 247; 32 So. 441.

6 Christopher, etc., Co. v. Yeager, 202 111. 486; 67 N. E. 166; affirming 105 111. App. 126.

7 Paxton v. Vadbouker, 1 Neb. Unofficial 776; 96 N. W. 378.

8 Crug v. Gorham, 74 Conn. 541; 51 Atl. 519; W. K. Henderson Lumber Co. v. Stilwell, 130 Mich. 124; 89 N. W. 718.

9 South Gardiner Lumber Co. v. Bradstreet, 97 Me. 165; 53 Atl. 1110.

10 McFadden v. Henderson, 128 Ala. 221; 29 So. 640.

11 Border City, etc., Co. v. Adams, 69 Ark. 219; 62 S. W. 591.

12 Tradewater Coal Co. v. Lee (Ky.), 68 S. W. 400.