51 Me. 146 | Me. | 1862
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
In our view, of this case, it becomes unnecessary to consider the rulings of the Judge at Nisi Prius, made previous to the amendment of the writ, by the insertion of the new count on the written contract, which was as follows, viz.:— "Kennebunk, Oct. 16, 1858.
"Mr. Edmund Warren,
" Bo’t of George T. Jones,
"All the apparatus for making soap, consisting of boilers, leaches, bbls., tubs, &c.; also, all the ashes and soap, &c., now on hand; also, one wagon, one pung-double runners; 'also, all my trade and customers.
"Rc’d payment by cash and notes,
" George T. Jones.”
Upon the introduction of this written contract, or bill of sale, it was incumbent on the Judge to give the legal construction, unless it embraced some latent ambiguity; in which event he should have submitted the construction to the jury, together with such parol testimony as might tend to the ascertainment of the intention of the parties.
It is only the last clause in the contract, which leads to any embarrassment. But, in our opinion, the perplexity was not so great as to need the intervention of the jury.
Exceptions sustained.I, — JVonsuit taken off,— And the case is to stand for trial.