On 2 September, the defendants wrote to the plaintiffs offering to sell them certain fleeces of wool and requiring an answer in the course of post.

[1] The plaintiffs posted their acceptance on the same day but it was not received until 9 September.

The defendants argued that there could not be a binding contract until the answer was actually received, and until then they were free to sell the wool to another buyer.

[1] Instead it must be considered that the offerors were making the offer to the plaintiffs during every moment that the letter was in the post.

But because the delay was the fault of the defendant it was taken that the acceptance did arrive in course of post.