I concur in overruling the exceptions, but it seems to me that it is laying down the rule of damages too broadly to say that the damages in all such eases should be the difference in the market value between the time when the goods ought to have arrived and when they did arrive. There may be cases where the plaintiff would not really suffer to that extent by reason of the non-deli very. Plainly, he would not, if he had on hand more than he.could sell on the falling market.