Christian v. Moore

The supply pipes were a necessary part of the toilets, the subject of' the contract between the parties, and were included in the general description of the-contract. The contract was not fulfilled without the delivery of such pipes. 35 Cyc. p. 100; note, 8 L. R. A. (N. S.) 793.

We think the evidence shows that the-title to the property passed to the purchaser on delivery thereof to the warehouseman. Irvin v. Edwards, 92 Tex. 258, 47 S. W. 719; Mechem on Sales, § 1185 et seq.; R. C. L. vol. 24, p. 14, § 274; also sections 276, 303; notes, 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 47. The fact that the purchase was…