The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-06-24
BIDS FOR CARRYING THE MAILS-OPINION OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE,


June 81, 1858.
Sin: Your letter of the 18th instant submits two
questions
l. Can person who files written proposal for carry
ing the mails withdraw it before it is accepted by the de-
partmentf
II. Is bidder bound by proposal in his own hand
writing without his signature
l. An offer to make contract is not itself contract
1t takes two to make bargain An agreement requires
the consent of minds the same thing ut the same
time proposal to do not to do particular thing is
the act Of person. The proposer may withdraw it,
and it, after the withdrawal the other party signifies his
willingness to accept that but another proposal coming
from the opposite side.
withdrawal, however, mugt be notified The mere
intention to withdraw Is not withdrawal
Here there rule Of the department that bids put
in should not be withdrawn after certain time whether
accepted not 1t Is necessary that such rule should
exist and Congress ought to enact It. But you have
power in the present state OF the law to enforce it,
long it remains regulation Its utmost effect will
be given to 1t by allowing it to enter into and become
part of the offer The proposal then would he read
the bidder had appended to it promise not to with
draw 1t before the department should decide upon it,
Such promise would create 1moral obligation but all
the books say that 1t Is nndu paum and not binding In
law II offer to sell you my property certain terms
it open during that time may, nevertheless retiact my
offer whenever please before you give notice of
your acceptance.
In Scotland France and Holland as well probably an
law the basis OF their Codes offer coupled with prom
se not to withdraw 1t for specified time is rreyocable
until the time expires. But the law unyeld-
ingy refuses to hold any responsible for what he
has promised unless he has either received valuable
consideration bound himself by sealed instrument
The law is the standard by which the rights Of
the parties in this case must be tried
am, therefore, of opinion that ii you would order
suit to be brought against bidder who refuses to carry
the mails agrceaby to his proposal he could defeat you
by showing that he withdrew his bid before you accept
ed it.
ii. No act of Congress requires that bid shall be
signed Your printed instructions say It ought to be.
need not discuss the question how far bidder take
advantage Of his act in violating the Instructions
you have given about the form Of his proposal Let it
be assumed that bid must he signed may it not be
signed by the party without writing his at the foot
of the instrument? Certainly it may, The cases
countless in which 1t has been held that the statutes
frauds aud Of Wills which require signing, fully
complied with when the Is written by the proper
hand either in the body Of the instrument, the
Margin anywhere else, that its authenticity and
genuineness sufficiently attestcd Mr.. Duh is there
fore bound by his bid much il he had written his
name at the bottom of the paper.
Respectfully, yours
j. S. BLACK.
Hon. A. v BRows, Postmaster General.