Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/364

 350 FEDERAL REPORTER. �It is concedecl that if the Whickham was "about to sail," giving that phrase the effect it was intended to have, Schu- macker & Co. tockk the risk of her arrivai in time to answer the purposes; but if she was not, that the warranty to that effect was broken, and her owners must make good the loss caused bj the breacb. �"About" is a relative term. It may indicate one thing •when applied to one state of facts, and another under differ- ent circumstances. "Contracts, when their meaning is not clear, are to be construed in the light of the circumstances surrounding the parties when they were made, and the prae- tical interpretations which they, by their conduct, have given the provisions in controversy." Lowber v. Bangs, 2 Wall. 737. The prominent fact in this case is that a vessel was wanted to load at Baltimore in August. This was brought directly to the attention of ail the contracting parties, and it was well understood that Schumacker & Co. would not take the Whickham unless there was a reasonable probability of her arrivai in time. That the charter would not have been made if it had been known that she could not get away from Benizaf until the evening of the 7th is apparent from the fact that, as Boon as it was ascertained she did not pass out from Gibraltar until the 9th, steps were taken to get another vessel in her place. In addition to this, the testimony shows that when the parties were making their calculations as to the time she would probably reach Baltimore, it was assumed that she either had sailed, or, at the latest, would sajl on the next day, which' wàs the second of August. It was not supposed that her time to Philadelphia would be less than 20 days, and this, with a reasonable allowance for unloading, could not put her in Baltimore earlier than the 28th or 29th, if she sailed as late as the 2d. Her actual time to Philadelphia exceeded the esti- mate, but this, if her sailing had been prompt, would have been at the fisk of the charterers. �Paroi evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of $, written instrument, but, where ambiguity exists, it may be given in aid of interpretation to show the facts and circum;- ����