As between two constructions, each reasonable, one of which will make the contract enforceable, and the other of which will make it unenforceable, that construction which makes the contract enforceable will be preferred.1 Thus if a contract is fairly open to two constructions, one of which will accomplish the intention of the parties and the other of which will defeat such intention,2 or will make the contract meaningless,3 or uncertain,4 the former construction is to be preferred. As between two possible constructions, one of which makes the instrument an executory contract and the other of which makes it an option, the court will prefer the construction which will make it an executory contract, since by such construction mutual rights are conferred upon both of the parties thereto.5

1 See Sec. 657 et seq.

2 Clarke v. Dunraven [1897], A. C. 59; First National Bank v. Mcintosh & Peters' Live Stock & Commission Co., 72 Kan. 603, 84 Pac. 535; Smyser v. Fair, 73 Kan. 773, 85 Pac. 408.

3 See Sec. 657 et seq.

4 See Sec. 2050.

5 Farley v. Board of Education, - Okla. - .162 Pac. 797.

6 See Sec. 657 et seq.

1 England. North-Western Salt Co. v. Electrolytic Alkali Co. [1914], A. C. 461.

United States. Cooper v. Northern Pacific Ry. Co., 212 Fed. 533.

California. Mebius v. Mills, 150 Cal 229, 88 Pac. 917.

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

Iowa. Sinclair v. National Surety Co., 132 Ia. 549, 107 N. W. 184; Cole v. Brown-Hurley Hardware Co., 139 Ia. 487, 18 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1161, 117 N. W. 746.

Kentucky. Berry v. Frisbie (Ky.), 86 S. W. 558, 27 Ky. Law Rep. 724.

Michigan. Millen v. Potter, 190 Mich. 262, 157 N. W. 101.

Missouri. National Bank v. Flanagan Mills & Elevator Co., 268 Mo. 547, 188 S. W. 117.

Montana. Finley v. School District, 51 Mont. 411, 153 Pac. 1010; Haley v. Hollenback, 53 Mont. 494, 165 Pac. 459.

Hew Jersey. Empire Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Morris, 73 N. J. L. 602, 65 Atl. 450.

New York. De Cicco v. Schweizer, 221 N. Y. 431, 117 N. E. 807.

North Carolina. Beasley v. Aberdeen & Rockftsh R. Co., 145 N. Car. 272, 59 S. E. 60; Torrey v. Cannon, 171 N. Car. 519, 88 S. E. 768; Edwards v. Jefferson Standard Life Ins. Co., 173 N. Car. 614, 92 S. E. 695.

Oregon. North Pacific Lumber Co. v. Spore, 44 Or. 462, 75 Pac. 890.

South Dakota. Trumbauer v. Rust, 36 S. D. 301, 154 N. W. 801.

Washington. Ayars v. O'Connor, 45 Wash. 132, 88 Pac. 119; Crawford v. Seattle, R. & S. Ry. Co., 86 Wash. 628, 150 Pac. 1155.

Tennessee. Morley v. Power, 78 Tenn. (10 Lea) 219; New Memphis Gaslight Co. Cases, 105 Tenn. 268, 80 Am. St. Rep. 880, 60 S. W. 206.

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; De Cicco v. Schweizer, 221 N. Y. 431, 117 N. E. 807; Frierson v. Blanton, 60 Tenn. (1 Baxt.) 272; Atlanta Guano Co. v. Phipps (Tenn. Ch. App.), 41 S. W. 1087; New Memphis Gaslight Co. Cases, 105 Tenn. 268, 80 Am. St. Rep. 880, 60 S. W. 206.

3 Irwin v. Nichols, 87 Ark. 97, 112 S. W. 209; Savage v. Smith, 170 Cal. 472, 150 Pac. 353; Shreffler v. Nadelhoffer, 133 11l. 536, 23 Am. St. Rep. 626, 25 N. E. 630; Sinclair v. National Surety Co., 132 Ia. 549, 107 N. W. 184.

4 Empire Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Morris, 73 N. J. L. 602, 65 Atl. 450.

5 Abel v. Gill, 95 Neb. 279, 145 N. W. 637; Dillinger v. Ogden, 244 Pa. St 20, 90 Atl. 446.