The construction of a contract is a question for the court if the terms of the contract and the extrinsic facts which may affect construction are free from dispute.1

1 United States. Titus v. Whiteside. 228 Fed. 965; New York & Philadelphia Coal & Coke Co. v. Meyersdale Coal Co., 236 Fed. 536, 149 C. C. A. 588; Carlin Construction Co. v. Guerini Stone Co., 241 Fed. 545, 154 C. C. A. 321.

Alabama. McFadden v. Henderson, 128 Ala. 221, 29 So. 640; Elliott v. Howison. 146 Ala. 568, 40 So. 1018; Lutz v. Van Heynigen Brokerage Co., - Ala. - , 75 So. 284.

Arkansas. Arkansas Fire Ins. Co. v. Wilson. 67 Ark. 553. 77 Am. St. Rep. 129, 48 L. R. A. 510, 55 S. W. 933; Dugan v. Kelly, 75 Ark. 55, 86 S. W. 831: Fletcher v. Simms, 75 Ark. 162, 86 S. W. 993; Thomas v. Johnson, 78 Ark. 574, 95 S. W. 468; Storm' v. Montgomery, 79 Ark. 172, 95 S. W. 149; Radford v. Practical Premium Co., 125 Ark. 199, 188 S. W. 562; Engles v. Blocker, 127 Ark. 385. 192 S. W. 193; Farmers' Union Mercantile Co. v. Pinkerton, 128 Ark. 640, 194 S. W. 709.

California. Green v. Soule, 145 Cal. 96, 78 Pac. 337.

Connecticut. Levin v. Now Britain Knitting Co., 78 Conn. 338, 61 Atl. 1073.

District of Columbia. Rheam v. Martin, 26 D. C. App. 181.

Georgia. McLelland v. Singletary, 113 Ga. 601, 38 S. E. 942; Nelson v. Spence, 129 Ga. 35, 58 S. E. 697.

Illinois. Illinois Central Ry. Co. v. Foulks, 191 111. 57, 60 N. E. 890 [af-firming, 92 111. App. 391]; Foster v. Chicago, 197 111. 264, 64 N. E. 322 [affirming, 96 111. App. 4]; Traders', etc., Ins. Co. v. Humphrey, 207 111. 540, 69 N. E. 875 [affirming, 109 111. App.

2461; Dunn v. Crichfield, 214 111. 292. 73 N. E. 386; Rosenbaum v. Devine, 271 111. 354, 111 N. E. 97.

Indiana. Ault Woodenware Co. v. Baker, 26 Ind. App. 374, 58 N. E. 265.

Iowa. Grasmier v. Wolf (Ia.), 90 N. W. 813; Comptograph Co. v. Burroughs Adding Machine Co., 179 Ia. 83, 159 N. W. 465.

Kentucky. Licking Rolling Mill Co. v. Snyder, 28 Ky. Law Rep. 357, 89 S. W. 249; Georgetown Water, Gas, Electric & Power Co. v. Smith (Ky.), 97 S. W. 1119, 30 Ky. Law Rep. 253.

Maryland. Phoenix Pad Manufacturing Co. v. Roth, 127 Md. 540, 96 Atl. 762.

Michigan. Sherk v. Holmes, 125 Mich. 118, 83 N. W. 1016; Douglass v. Paine, 141 Mich. 485, 104 N. W. 781; Cutler v. Spens, 191 Mich. 603, 158 N. W. 224.

Minnesota. Bell Lumber Co. v. Seaman, 136 Minn. 106, 161 N. W. 383.

Missouri. McClurg v. Whitney, 82 Mo. App. 625.

Nebraska. McCormick, etc., Co. v. Davis. 61 Neb. 406, 85 N. W. 390, Hinman v. Mfg. Co., 65 Neb. 187, 90 N. W. 934.

New Jersey. Grueber Engineering Co. v. Waldron, 71 N. J. L. 597, 60 Atl. 386: Decker v. George W. Smith & Co., 88 N. J. L. 630, 96 Atl. 915; Sommer Faucet Co. v. Commercial Casualty Ins. Co., 89 N. J. L. 693, 99 Atl. 342.

New York. Sattler v. Hallock, 160 N. Y. 291, 73 Am. St. Rep. 686, 46 L. R. A. 679, 54 N. E. 667.

North Carolina. Brite v. Mfg. Co., 129 N. Car. 34, 39 S. E. 634; Banks v. Blades Lumber Co., 142 N. Car. 49, 54 S. E. 844; Young v. Fosburg Lumber

This rule applies to written contracts,2 including written contracts which consist of a number of different writings,3 such as letters,4 or letters and telegrams.5 It applies to a written offer made by one party and acted upon by the other,6 such as a circular which has been issued by a building and loan association and in reliance upon which stock has been taken.7 It applies where the written contract has been lost and its contents are proved by secondary evidence.8 It applies to contracts part oral and part written,9 or to contracts entirely oral,10 if the facts from which the terms of the contract are to be ascertained are undisputed and only one inference is possible therefrom. The rule that the construction of a written contract is for the court is sometimes so stated as to be limited to cases in which the contract itself is free from ambiguity.11 This method of stating the rule, however, is probably intended to exclude from the power of the court to construe contracts, only contracts in which there is a genuine dispute either as to the terms of the contract itself, or as to the surrounding facts and circumstances which would affect the construction of the contract. If the court erroneously submits a question of construction to the jury, and the jury answers it correctly, the error is not reversible.12

Co., 147 N. Car. 26, 60 S. E. 654 Gay v. Roanoke R. & Lumber Co., 148 N. Car. 336, 62 S. E. 436; Barkley v. Atlantic Coast Realty Co., 170 N. Car. 481, 87 S. E. 219.

Oklahoma. Brown v. Coppadge, 54 Okla. 88, 153 Pac. 817; Pressley v. Incorporated Town, 54 Okla. 747, 154 Pac. 660; Comanche Mercantile Co. v. Wheeler, 55 Okla. 328, 155 Pac. 583.

Oregon. Dahlstrom v. Hudelson, 80 Or. 520, 157 Pac. 798.

Pennsylvania. Continental Title & Trust Co. v. Devlin, 209 Pa. St. 380, 58 Atl. 843; Keefer v. School District, 203 Pa. St. 334, 52 Atl. 245; Markley v. Godfrey, 254 Pa. St. 99, 98 Atl. 785.

South Carolina. Leaphart v. Bank, 45 S. Car. 563, 55 Am. St. Rep. 800, 33 L. R. A. 700, 23 N. E. 939; BateB-burg Cotton Oil Co. v. Southern Ry. Co., 103 S. Car. 494, 88 S. E. 360.

South Dakota. Hughes v. Rudy, 15 S. D. 460, 90 N. W. 136.

Texas. Amory Mfg. Co. v. Gulf, etc., R. R. Co., 89 Tex. 419, 59 Am. St. Rep. 65, 37 S. W. 856.

Utah. Manti City Sav. Bank v. Peterson, 33 Utah 209, 126 Am. St. Rep. 817, 93 Pac. 566.

Vermont. Bianchi Granite Co. v. Terre Haute Monument Co., 91 Vt. 177, 99 Atl. 875.

Virginia. Veitch v. Jenkins, 107 Va. 68, 57 S. E. 574.

Washington. Dennis v. Montesano National Bank, 38 Wash. 435, 80 Pac. 764; McGarry v. Superior Portland Cement Co., 95 Wash. 412, 163 Pac. 928.

West Virginia. McNeer v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co., 76 W. Va. 803, 86 S. E. 887.

Admission of inadmissible evidence as to the meaning of a term may therefore be non-prejudicial. Gordon v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., 197 Mich. 226, L. R. A. 1918E, 402, 163 N. W. 956.

2 Illinois. Dunn v. Crichfield, 214 111 292, 73 N. E. 386.

Kansas. Brown v. St. John Trust Co., 71 Kan. 134, 80 Pac. 37.

Michigan. Gordon v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., 197 Mich. 226, L. R. A. 1918E, 402, 163 N .W. 956.

North Carolina. Banks v. Blades Lumber Co., 142 N. Car. 49, 54 S. E. 844.

Oklahoma. Bales v. Northwestern Consol. Milling Co., 21 Okla. 421, 96 Pac. 599.

Pennsylvania. Continental Title & Trust Co. v. Devlin, 209 Pa. St. 380, 58 Atl. 843.

3 McDonough v. Williams, 77 Ark. 261, 8 L. R. A. (N.S.) 452, 92 S. W. 783; Bales v. Northwestern Consol. Milling Co., 21 Okla. 421, 96 Pac. 599.

As a written contract and photographs. G. R. Bianchi Granite Co. v. Terre Haute Monument Co., 91 Vt. 177, 99 Atl. 875.

4 United States. Scanlan v. Hodges, 52 Fed. 354, 3 C. C. A. 113; New York & Philadelphia Coal & Coke Co. v. Meyersdale Coal Co., 236 Fed. 536, 149 C. C. A. 588.

Arkansas. Radford v. Practical Premium Co., 125 Ark. 199, 188 S. W. 562; Engles v. Blocker, 127 Ark. 385, 192 S. W. 193.

North Carolina. Lindsay v. Ins. Co., 115 N. Car. 212, 20 S. E. 370.

Oklahoma. Comanche Mercantile Co. v. Wheeler, 55 Okla. 328, 155 Pac. 583.

South Carolina. Camps v. Carpin, 19 S. Car. 121.

Tennessee. Teasdale v. Manchester, 104 Tenn. 267, 56 S. W. 853.

Wisconsin. Ranney v. Higby, 5 Wis. 62.