The Rule of Contracts Tt is on thave two documents that the plaintit's build their case fea general role for the construe: tion of a written contract. that the language of the instrument is to be inverstood in its ordinary and natural meaning and evidence may not be received: to. show that the Taneuage was intended to be used"
the ordinary'
the parties with another th But the whole of the contract must Lolo and. natural meaning ap he considered in order to ascertain the meaning of any particular part, and in eases where the context shows that words were not intended to be used in the ordinary sense, such words are to be construed in har-many with the context.
The agreement of August 26 starts with the phrase,,"Muckenzi Ca, Ltd. of Shanghai will bu; for account and risk of Shanghs Lumber Company." And in the evidence and statement of claim the alleged agreement of Mackenzie 10 buy".or "purchase" has constantly been referred to. But looking at the letter of August 25 and the text of the agreement of August 26 and the correspondence hhetween the parties it is quite clear that the agreement was only finance the purchase of the timber and not one for the defendants themselves to make the purchase outright The agreement ocx on to say, mackenzie & Ca, will open a let-of credit? but it is understand and address of "your representative, that by doing so Mackenzie & Ca. take no responsibility whatever for shipment, quality, quantity ete." and later the' agreement states, which you may entrust, the inspection sistance rendered. in together with Me.) financing Mackenzie will receive At this opportunity, we wish—al ete. to inform sou that the lumber accepted The letter of August 25 starts, From Suzuki & Ca. ie equal to OBS "Supplementary to our negotiations Yours faithfully, re-opening a letter of credit."' This is clearly referring to a letter
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.