As between two constructions, each probable, one of which makes the contract fair and reasonable and the other of which makes it unfair and unreasonable, the former should always be preferred.1 Thus a contract by a principal to furnish his agent samples and advertising matter means a reasonable amount, and not whatever the agent may demand.2 So a contract to furnish machinery to be set up in "good working order" means not at the very moment of completing the work, but after giving the vendee a reasonable opportunity for testing it.3 A contract by A to construct a heater to B's satisfaction means, if B dies before the heater is finished, to the satisfaction of B's executor and devisee, and not to B's satisfaction.4 Where A agreed to pay B for certain advertising by deducting the amount of such bill from the price of any launch that B might buy of A, it was held that such launch was to be sold on "exactly the same terms as it offered other customers."5 So under a contract for the sale of sugar "for shipment within thirty days by sail or steam at seller's option," "shipment" means placing the sugar within such time on board of a vessel which is honestly endeavoring to secure a full cargo, and which is bound for the proper port, and does not mean that such vessel must clear within such time.6 So contracts in restraint of trade will be construed to impose reasonable limitations as to time7

5 Frost, etc., Co. v. Ins. Co., 37 Minn. 300; 5 Am. St. Rep. 846; 34 N. W. 35.

6 Hardie, etc., Co. v. Oil Mill, -Miss. - ; 36 So. 262.

1 Shreffler v. Nadelhoffer, 133 111. 536; 23 Am. St. Rep. 626; 25 N. E. 630; New Memphis Gaslight Co. Cases, 105 Tenn. 268; 80 Am. St. Rep. 880; 60 S. W. 206; Morley v. Power, 10 Lea (Tenn.) 219.

2 Cravens v. Cotton Mills, 120 Ind. 6; 16 Am. St. Rep. 298; 21 N. E. 981; Powers v. Clarke, 127 N. Y. 417; 28 N. E. 402; New Memphis Gaslight Co. Cases, 105 Tenn. 268; 80 Am. St. Rep. 880; 60 S. W. 206; Frierson v. Blanton, 1 Baxt. (Tenn.)

272; Atlanta Guano Co. v. Phipps (Tenn. Ch. App.), 41 S. W. 1087.

3 Shreffler v. Nadelhoffer, 133 111. 536; 23 Am. St. Rep. 626; 25 N. E. 630.

4 South Carolina, etc., Ry. v. Ry., 93 Fed. 543; 35 C. C. A. 423; Wyatt v. Irrigation Co., 18 Colo. 298; 36 Am. St. Rep. 280; 33 Pac. 144; Al-free v. Gates, 82 Ia. 19; 47 N. W. 993; Pitney v. Bolton, 45 N. J. Eq. 639; 18 Atl. 211; North Pacific Lumber Co. v. Spore, - Or. - ; 75 Pac. 890.

5 Rackemann v. Improvement Co., 167 Mass. 1; 57 Am. St. Rep. 427; 44 N. E. 990.

6 Joy v. St. Louis, 138 U. S. 1.

1 Ingersoll v. Coram, 127 Fed. 418; McElroy v. Swope, 47 Fed. 380; Wyatt v. Irrigation Co., 18 Colo. 298; 36 Am. St. Rep. 280; 33 Pac. 144; Bartlett v. Wheeler, 195 111. 445; 63 N. E. 169; affirming, 96 111. App. 342; Dederiek v. Wolfe, 68 Miss. 500; 24 Am. St. Rep. 283; 9 So. 350; Lovelace v. Travelers', etc., Association, 126 Mo. 104; 47 Am. St. Rep. 638; 30 L. R. A. 209; 28 S. W. 877; Gillett v. Bank, 160 N. Y. 549; 55 N. E. 292; Wright v. Reusens, 133 N. Y. 298, 305; 31 N. E. 215; Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Myers, 62 O. S. 529; 49 L. R. A. 760; 57 N. E. 458; Kentzler v. Accident Association, 88 Wis. 589; 43 Am. St. Rep. 934; 60 N. W. 1002.

2 Jensen v. Perry, 126 Pa. St. 495;

12 Am. St. Rep. 888; 17 Atl. 665.

3 Edison, etc., Co. v. Navigation Co., 8 Wash. 370; 40 Am. St. Rep. 910; 24 L. R. A. 315; 36 Pac. 260.

4 Adams Radiator Co. v. Schnader, 155 Pa. St. 394; 35 Am. St. Rep. 893; 26 Atl. 745.

5 Hand v. Power Co., 167 N. Y. 142; 60 N. E. 425.

6 Ledon v. Havermeyer, 131 N. Y. 179; 8 L. R. A. 245; 24 N. E. 297.

7 Saddlery Hardware Mfg. Co. v. Hillsborough Mills, 68 N. H. 216; 73 Am. St. Rep. 569; 44 Atl. 300. (Here a contract by a vendor of goods not to sell like goods to anyone else in that locality was construed to mean until vendee had a reasonable opportunity to resell such goods.) or place,8 if it does not appear to be the intention of the parties to impose an unreasonable limitation. So a contract not to sell certain realty for less than a certain price "will be construed to restrict it for a reasonable time only.9