Tweedie Footwear Corp. v. Roberts-Schofield Co.

— Eespondent placed two1 orders with appellant’s salesman October 11, 1925, for the manufacture, sale and delivery to it of two lots of shoes. The orders were forwarded to appellant by the salesman, who instructed his principal that they were not to be “cut” (manufacture commenced by actually cutting the leather necessary for making up the shoes) until confirmed by the buyer, respondent. A letter followed from respondent confirming the orders, and stating, “we want No. 553 to come same as scheduled on order in 5 to 7 weeks, but we want order No. 554 to come on Dec. 1st instead of Dec. 10th.”…