Sarrat

Under a written contract dated April 29, 1926, the defendant agreed to sell to the plaintiffs 300 bales of cotton to be delivered on or before December 1, 1926, with the proviso that if the same were not delivered the plaintiffs should have the option to purchase cotton in the open market and charge the defendant “the difference in market value at such time”. In this action to recover damages for failure to deliver any of the cotton the plaintiffs recovered judgment, from which the defendant has appealed. No brief has been filed on behalf of the respondents.

A number of the points raised by the appellant are based upon the contention that under the terms of the contract he was under no obligation to deliver any cotton unless the same should be raised during that season upon lands owned or controlled by him. These contentions are without merit as the terms of the contract are plain and must prevail in the absence of any pleading of fraud or grounds for reformation.

, A further contention that the judgment, with respect to the amount of the damages, is not sustained by either the findings or the evidence, must be sustained. The contract fails to fix a definite price for the cotton…