Statement of the case. adjoining lots to be placed together, and the one year notes to be separated from the two year notes, and each deed of incumbrance to contain a proviso that upon payment of the proportionate amount for which one or more lots are incumbered, they shall be duly released. Abstract, showing a perfect title, to be furnished by vendor. It is understood that if the owner shall refuse to ratify the separation of incumbrances, Bissell has the right to rescind this contract. Abstract to be furnished within thirty days, or as soon thereafter as it can be reasonably procured. Received, on account of the above purchase money, one hundred dollars. Dated this 18th day of November, A. D. 1872. per M. N. Lord, Agent." Terry, in his answer, denied the contract, and the authority of Lord to make it, setting up the Statute of Frauds requiring such authority to be in writing. Answers were filed by the other defendants, and upon issues formed by replications, the cause was heard upon pleadings and proofs, and a decree passed dismissing complainant's bill, and he appealed to this court, assigning error upon that decree. It appears, from the evidence, that Terry resided in Louisville, Ky., and Lord was a real estate broker, residing in Chicago; that on the 26th of October, 1872, Lord, being in Louisville, inquired of Terry whether he had some real estate in Chicago which he wished to sell. The latter replied that he had, and had a day or two previously received an offer for it. Lord wished to know the location of it. Terry not having the papers at hand, was then unable to give it. Upon Lord stating that he was in the real estate business, it was then arranged that Terry should, as soon as convenient, send descriptions to Lord at Chicago, and as the latter was expecting to return home on the following Monday, he was to ascertain the value and inform Terry. Lord testified that Terry Statement of the case. then told him that if he could sell the lots at $550 a lot, to sell them. This, Terry denies, and denies that he gave him any authority to sell. Neither party is corroborated on this point, except so far as the letters go. Two days after this interview Terry wrote Lord at Chicago the following letter: "LOUISVILLE, Oct. 28, 1872. "BRO. LORD: The numbers of lots fronting on the avenue are as follows: Block five (5), 5 to 9, inclusive; 16 to 22 inclusive. Block 12, 31 to 35, and 37 to 45, inclusive. Block 7, fronting on Courtland street, 45, 46, 47, 48. I don't feel willing to take less that $550 per lot; one-third cash, one and two years, with eight per cent interest, and would like to have more if to be had. Let me hear from you at your earliest convenience. "Yours truly, "W. TERRY." Not hearing from Lord, on the 9th of November, 1872, Terry wrote him again: "LOUISVILLE, Nov. 9, 1872. "BRO. LORD: I wrote you some two weeks ago in relation to lots on Milwaukee Avenue, with numbers of same. I would like to hear from you on receipt of this, as to their value. I am offered $500 per lot, one-third cash, balance one and two years with eight per cent interest. "Yours truly, "W. TERRY." Bissell having meanwhile made a proposition to Lord to purchase the lots at $525 each, the latter, November 12, addressed a letter to Terry, as follows: "CHICAGO, Nov. 12, 1872. "DEAR BRO. TERRY: I am offered $525 per lot for the whole of your lots; one-third cash, balance in two years at eight per cent interest, payable annually. You are to furnish the purchaser an abstract, and title to be good in you; Statement of the case. you to pay all taxes levied in 1872. Let me know by return "BRO. LORD: "M. N. LORD." "LOUISVILLE, KY., Nov. 14, 1872. Yours of the 12th inst. is to hand. I must adhere to my original proposition, $550 each, for all; onethird cash, balance one and two years, with eight per cent interest. I am offered my price, with little variation in amount paid down. "Yours truly, "W. TERRY." This last letter was received by Lord on the 18th, same month, and Bissell being in Lord's office at the time, the letter was read to him. Immediately, on that day, the instrument set out in the bill was drawn up by Bissell, who is an attorney, residing in Chicago. It was signed by Lord, as it now appears, and by arrangement between him and Bissell, it was to be submitted by Lord to Terry, for his approval, by sending the latter a copy. The letter, inclosing the copy to Terry, is as follows: "CHICAGO, Nov. 18, 1872. WILLIAM TERRY-Dear Bro.: Yours of the 14th inst. received this afternoon. My party was in the office at the time, and I closed the sale on your description and terms, and stated in the contract, first, that the one year note should cover one-half of the property, and the other half in the trust deed, and to be released in one-third parcels, or in lots, if necessary; i. e. all that were included in the trust deed under the first note, to be released on payment thereof at the end of the first year, if not released before; and so with the second note at the end of two years. This is a sort of necessity, on account of the fact that it is retailed to Germans ; however, it generally amounts to nothing the first year, and not much the second year. Still, if one wants to pay an eight per cent mortgage, when money is worth ten per cent, all right; it is not likely that it will be paid beforehand. Statement of the case. You will notice, in the copy of the contract which I send you, that you are to ratify or reject that part. It is our usual way with such property, and I do hope you will not object, as money is awful tight, and I have worked hard to earn my 2 per cent commission. How about abstracts? If you have one, please send it, or give me an order, with instructions when and where to get it, and I will attend to it immediately. The papers I will make, and no cost, and forward to you. I consider the sale a good one, our market being so close that not much will be done till spring. Please to return the contract, with approval, and directions about abstract, etc. If you want to place the money on good paper, I can get you two per cent a month. Hoping this will meet your approval, I remain, "Fraternally yours, M. N. LORD." Terry, upon the receipt of this letter, replied immediately, as follows: "LOUISVILLE, Nov. 20, 1872. "BRO. LORD: Yours, with copy of contract, came to hand this morning. I wrote you on yesterday that the property was sold. Parties advised me yesterday, or rather their letter came to hand advising me, and I accepted and then advised you. Inclosed I return you the copy of contract. you had gotten your parties to the point sooner. "Yours truly, I wish W. TERRY." It further appeared that Bissell did not, in fact, pay the one hundred dollars acknowledged in the supposed contract, but instead thereof gave Lord his check for that amount, which, on the 19th of November, 1872, he demanded back of Lord. This check has never been paid. Messrs. UPTON, BOUTELL & WATERMAN, for the appellant. Messrs. COOPER, GARNETT & PACKARD, for the appellees. Opinion of the Court. Mr. JUSTICE MCALLISTER delivered the opinion of the Court: The principal question in this case is, whether the instrument set out in the bill, which the complainant sought to have specifically enforced in equity, as the contract of Terry, ever became obligatory upon him. That question, under the issues formed, involves two others: First-Whether Lord, the alleged agent, was duly authorized, within the meaning of the Statute of Frauds, to make that contract in the name of Terry. Second-Whether, if he was, a contract as alleged was completely made before the authority was revoked. Counsel for appellant raised a question, in limine, that by the laws of Kentucky the authority of an agent to make such a contract is not required to be in writing. And they say that Terry, at the interview with Lord, at Louisville, in that State, on the 26th of October, 1872, gave the latter full and complete verbal authority to make a contract for the sale of the lands in question, and that therefore no question under the Statute of Frauds of the State of Illinois, can arise. The first answer we make to that position is, that the fact is not established by a preponderance of evidence. Lord is the only witness who testifies to it, and who is interested, to the extent of his commissions, to make out the authority. But it is denied by Terry, who testifies that Lord was simply employed to ascertain and advise him as to the value of the lots, and in this, Terry is strongly corroborated by the correspondence. The second answer to this point is perfectly conclusive. The lands in question are situate in this State. That being so, any conveyance, or contract for the sale of them, would be governed by the lex situs. This is familiar doctrine, and scarcely needs the citation of authority for its support. Sherman v. Gassett, 4 Gilm. 521, and cases there cited; Story's Confl. of Laws, sec. 363 et seq., sec. 435. The statute provides that "no action shall be brought to charge any person upon any contract for the sale of lands, |