It is the general rule, that the liability of a surety or a guarantor cannot be extended by implication or construction beyond the precise terms of their contract.8

The above rule is of universal application, no matter what variety of agreement the surety's contract may assume, and it is founded on the soundest principles of justice and public policy. From the practice of the courts in limiting the liability of the surety to the strict terms of his contract, the statement is made that the surety is a favorite of the law, but the use of the expression must not be misunderstood. The surety position is usually one of special misfortune, where his principal defaults, and the favor of the law is to excuse him for nothing that he has expressly bound himself to answer for, but the favor extends only to keeping his liability strictly within the terms of his agreement. The liability of the surety then is determined by the meaning of the language of his contract. A reasonable interpretation of the language used is to be had, and practically the same rules of construction are to be observed, in determining what the contract was, and in arriving at the intention of the parties, as are usually employed. These things are to be gathered, as in other cases, from the surrounding circumstances. The terms of the contract, and the circumstances, must be examined in any case, to ascertain the extent of the liability and the character of the obligation assumed.9

7 Hooker vs. Gooding, 86 I11., 60.

8 Brandt on Suretyship and Guaranty, Vol. 1, Sec. 93; Vinyard vs. Barnes, 124 I11., 346; Gunn vs. Geary, 44 Mich., 615; Burson vs. Andes, 83 Va., 445.