Correct.  The defendant was manifesting a willingness to enter a bargain in the sense that he was certainly willing to consider selling to the plaintiff.  What the defendant did not do was transfer to the plaintiff the power to conclude the bargain by his assent.  If he had done that, he would no longer be free to sell to the first-comer.  To see why, imagine that the plaintiff did have the power to conclude the bargain by his assent, and that, before he heard from the plaintiff, the defendant sold to the first-comer; the danger is that if the plaintiff agrees to the sale, the defendant ends up having agreed to sell the same property twice. 

 

Continue