Where plaintiff authorized defendant to sell property for which plaintiff was agent, the profits to be divided equally between them, but did not transfer the exclusive agency to defendant, an attempt on plaintiff's part to effect a sale to defendant's customer was not inconsistent with his contract with defendant, and evidence thereof was immaterial in an action by the plaintiff to recover his share of the profits on a sale made by defendant. Madler v. Pozorski, 124 Wis. 477, 102 N. W. 892; Duff & Conger v. Makley, 175 N. Y. Sup. 777.