Where the breach is by the vendee, the vendor may hold the stock and sue for the price or the unpaid balance of it ; Reed v. Hayt, 51 N. Y. Super. Ct. 121, affirmed on opinion below in 109 N. Y. 659, 17 N. E. 418; Thorndtke v. Locke, 98 Masfi. 340 ; or he may sell it for the vendee and sue for the difference between the contract and sale price; Lebus v. Roode, 16 Ky. L. Rep. 128 ; Stewart v. Canty, 8 M. & W. 160; or he may retain the stock and sue for the difference between the market price at the date of de livery and the contract price ; Hamilton v. Finnegan, 117 Ia. 623, 91 N. W. 1039; Reed v. Hayt, supra; Corser v. Hale, 149 Pa. 274, 24 Atl. 285; Sharpe v. White, 25 Ont. L. Rep. 298. Where the vendor agreed to repurchase and refused to receive and pay for the stock, he was held liable for the contract price ; Browne v. Plow Works, 62 Minn. 90, 64 N. W. 66; and where the vendee failed to pay for stock sold with no price designated, he was held liable and the measure of dam ages was the market price at the time and place of delivery ; Deck's Adm'r v. Feld, 38 Mo. App. 674.
See generally as to the measure of damag es for breach of such contracts, note to Vos v. Child, Hulswit & Co., supra, in 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 368.
CormisioN. The general principle followed by the courts of admiralty in cases of colli sion between vessels is that the damages awarded against the offending vessel must be sufficient to restore the other to the condi tion she was in at the time of the collision, if restoration is practicable. ' Both damages to vessel and cargo are to be made good. But hypothetical and consequential damages are excluded. The loss of the use of the in
jured vessel while undergoing repairs is proper to be included. See The Margaret J. Sanford, 37 Fed. 148. If the injured ves sel is a total loss, her market value at the time is the measure of damages. See Wil liamson v. Barrett, 13 How. (U. S.) 106, 14 L. Ed. 68 ; Vantine v. The Lake, 2 Wall. Jr. 52, Fed. Cas. No. 16,878 ; Jolly v. Terre Haute Drawbridge Co., 6 McLean, 238, Fed. Cas. No. 7,441; O'Neil v. The I. M. North, 37 Fed. 270.
If the fault is equal on the part of both vessels, the loss is to be divided between them ; New Haven Steam Transp. Co. v. The Continental, 14 Wall. (U. S.) 345, 20 L. Ed. 801; Atlee v. Packet Co., 21 Wall. (U. S.) 389, 22 L. Ed. 619 ; The Wydale, 37 Fed. 716 ; The Viola, 60 Fed. 296; The Manitoba, 122 U. S. 97, 7 Sup. Ct. 1158, 30 L. Ed. 1095.
For a total loss of cargo, its value at the place of shipment, or its cost, including ex penses, charges, insurance, and interest, should be allowed ; The Umbria, 59 Fed. 489, 8 C. C. A. 194, 11 U. S. App. 612 ; when part is recovered and sold, after expenses are in curred, the rule is to allow the difference be tween the market value of the goods, if unin jured, and the value in their damaged con dttion ; d. The allowance of interest and costs in case of collision rests in the discre tion of the lower court, and will not be dis turbed on appeal ; The Maggie J. Smith, 123 U. S. 349, 8 Sup. Ct. 159, 31 L. Ed. 175.
Funeral expenses of persons whose death was caused by collision are recoverable as part of the damages against the vessel in fault ; The Mauch Chunk, 139 Fed. 747.