Cole v. Common Council of Homer

Plaintiffs sued and recovered below for the price of a wind-mill pumping apparatus which they claim to have sold defendants in the fall of 1873. The contract contained, as is usual, two branches — one declaring the duty of plaintiffs, and the other that of defendants. The controversy before us is chiefly upon the construction of this written agreement.

It provided — first, that plaintiffs would furnish and put up the machinery in question as described, and which was guaranteed to furnish an ample supply of water in any number of reservoirs which the party of the second part may make, “ and…