or $6,800 from Schmidt, Inc., Invoice 1980, terms 1/10, n/30. dum 230 from Schmidt, Inc., for damaged merchandise totaling $380 that was returned; the goods were 80, dated February 10. idt, Inc., for Invoice 1980 of February 10, less the return of February 13 and less the cash 5,800 on account to Bushard Company, Invoice 1980, terms 1/10, n/30. The cost of merchandise sold was um 230 to Bushard Company for damaged merchandise totaling $380 that was returned; the goods were 380, dated February 10. The cost of the returned goods was $300. Bushard Company for Invoice 1980 of February 10, less the return of February 13 and less the cash ual inventory system. Journalize the transactions above in a general journal for both Bushard Company answers to the nearest whole dollar value.) or $6,800 from Schmidt, Inc., Invoice 1980, terms 1/10, n/30. dum 230 from Schmidt, Inc., for damaged merchandise totaling $380 that was returned; the goods were 80, dated February 10. idt, Inc., for Invoice 1980 of February 10, less the return of February 13 and less the cash 5,800 on account to Bushard Company, Invoice 1980, terms 1/10, n/30. The cost of merchandise sold was um 230 to Bushard Company for damaged merchandise totaling $380 that was returned; the goods were 380, dated February 10. The cost of the returned goods was $300. Bushard Company for Invoice 1980 of February 10, less the return of February 13 and less the cash ual inventory system. Journalize the transactions above in a general journal for both Bushard Company answers to the nearest whole dollar value.)