Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/86

 POPB V. PIL1.HT. 71 �"It fe Incnmbent npon the plaintiffs lu thls cause, before the jury can flnd that the plaintififs did fulfil the conditions of sald contract on their part, to prove to the satisfaction of the Jury not only that a part of the 500 tons alleged to have been tendered to the defendant by them under this contract was of the description contracted for, but that the whole of sald 500 tons was of that description. Under the contract sued on it was not incumbent upon the defendant to recelve any less quantlty than 500 tons of the description contracted for, and It la incumbait on the plaintiffs, before they can recover for any part of the Iron claimed to have been tendered by them to defendant, to prove that the whole of sald quantlty so tendered by them was of the description contracted for." �I give you that instruction, gentlemen, with this qualification, of course: it is not necessary that they should prove that every indi- vidual pig was alike. It is necessary that they should show that the lot, as a lot, came up to the description given in the contract. �It is a question of fact for tiie jury to determine upon the evidence before them, and under the instructions of the court, what descrip- tion of iron the parties to the contract sued on meant by the term in the contract, viz.. No. 1 Shott's Scotch pig-iron. The contract hav- ing been made in St. Louis, Missouri, any local or peculiar terms, or terras peculiar to the iron trade, which may be found in said contract, are to be understood as having whatever meaning was usually given to such terms by persons engaged in the iron trade in that city. �Evidence has been introduced teoding to show what is the meaning of that phrase, according to the usages of that trade in this market, and it is for the jury to consider and find upon that evidence what was the meaning of those words, viz., "No. 1 Shott's Scotch pig-iron," as understood by persons engaged in the iron trade in St. Louis. If the jury shall believe from the evidence before them that, according to the 'usages df persons dealing in and using pig-iron in St. Louis, the words "No. 1 Shott's Scotch pig-iron" were understood by such persons to mean pig-iron made in Scotland, Shott's furnace, and of such grade as should correspond to the grade of Scotch pig-iron commonly described or recognized in this market as No, 1, then the jury cannot find that the plaintiffs fulfilled their part of the contract sued on, unless the jury shall be satisfied, from the whole evidence before them, that the 500 tons of iron which was ofiered by the plain- tiffs to the defendant on or about the twenty-sixth of May, 1880, was iron made at Shott's furnace in Scotland, and did correspond, as to the grade thereof, with the grade of pig-iron usually known in this market as No. 1 when applied to Scotch pig-iron. �If the jury shall find from the evidence, according to the usage of ��� �