Defendant wrote plaintiff authorizing him to sell defendant's timber land in Arkansas, agreeing that if plaintiff put defendant in communication with a reliable purchaser defendant would protect plaintiff on a commission of five per cent.; plaintiff immediately corresponded with a purchaser who, at plaintiff's direction, wired defendant for the price, and this being agreed on, the purchaser wrote plaintiff a letter concerning the property, enclosing a skeleton option, which he desired defendant to execute; plaintiff then went to defendant's place of business and showed him the purchaser's letter with the option, and defendant, after some delay, signed the option, after inserting that the price should be net cash to him, but without any statement that it was to be free of commissions. Held, that defendant was not justified in believing that plaintiff was acting for the purchaser, and that it was, therefore, error for the court to direct a verdict for defendant in plaintiff's action for commissions. Love v. Scatcherd, 146 Fed. 1, 77 C. C. A. 1.