HOMANB V. NEWTON. 888 �That no demand -was necessary: McComUe v. Dattes, 6 East, 540; Bucklin v. BeaU, 38 Vt. 653; Stanley v. Gaylord, �I Cash. 586. �There was no waiver or estoppel: Sargent v. Metcalf, 5 G-ray, 306; Plumer v. Lord, 9 Allen, 455; Andrews v.Lyons, �II Allen, 349; Turner v. Cqffin, 12 Allen, 401; Zuchtman v. Roberts, 109 Mass. 55; Dezell v. Odell, 3 Hill, 219: Boot v. Lord, 23 Vt. 568. �C)iarle$ AUen, for defendants. �The vendor cannot claim against an innocent purchaser : Wait V. Oreen, 36 N. Y. 556; Hall v. Hinks, 21 Md. 406; Vavghn V. Hopson, 10 Bush, 337; Murch v. Wright, 46 111. 487; McA. Cen<. iî. Co. v. Phillips, 60 111. 190; 1 Parsons, Cont. 538; 1 Smith, L. C. (7th Am. Ed.) part 2, p. 1203. �By taking the acceptances the plaintiff -waived hia lien, •while they were running, and should be held to bave lost it, 80 far as the defendants are ooncemed, who stand somewhat like Bureties : Belshaw v. Bush, 11 C. B. 206 ; Valpy v. Oake- ley, 16 Q. B. 949; Okie v. Spencer, 2 Whart. 253; Myers v. Welles, 5 Hill, 463; Fellows v. Prentiss, 3 Denio, 512; Ap- pleton V. Parker, 15 Gray. 173 ; Green v. Fox, 7 Allen, 85. �A seller on condition must exact performance promptly, or he will be deemed to have waived the condition: Lees y. Richardson, 2 Hilton, 174; Bowen v. Burk, 13 Pa. St. 146; Hennequin v. Sands, 25 Wend. 640 ; 2 Schouler, Per. Prop. 302; Upton v. Sturbridge Cotton. MiUs, 111 Mass. 446; Haskins v. Warren, 115 Mass. 533 ; Freeman v. Nichais, 116 Mass. 309; Clough v. Lond., etc., Ry. Co. L. E. 7 Ex. 35; Morrison v. Universal Ins. Co.h. E. 8 Ex. 40. �The measure of damages is not the value of the logs, but the amount of the plaintiff's claim properly reduced by cred- its, etc. : Chamberlain V. Shaw, 18 Pick. 278 ; Squire v. HoU icnbeck, 9 Pick. 551; Kaley v. Shed, 10 Met. 317; Perry v. Glmidler, 2 Cush. 237; Briggs v. B. e L. R. Co. 6 Allen, 246; King v. Bangs, 120 Mass. 514; Chinery v. Vial, 5 H. & N. 288; Parish v. Wheeler, 22 N. Y. 494; Johnson y.Stear, 15 G. B. (N. S.) 330. ����
