Appellant union1 is the local affiliate of The Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers of America.2 Elmer C. Reeves was a member in good standing of both organizations at the time of his death and was survived by three children who paid his funeral expenses and who received $500 in death benefits from the Local.

Appellee, a friend of the decedent, was the named beneficiary of the death benefits of the Brotherhood, which she received, and she then brought this action against the Local to recover their death benefits in the sum of $500. From a judgment in favor of appellee, the Local appeals.

The Constitution of the Local provides for the payment of $500 as death benefits 3 but makes no provision for a member to designate a beneficiary as does the Brotherhood’s Constitution. During the trial ap-pellee introduced into evidence a letter4 she received from the business representative of the Local concerning the payment of death benefits.

The trial court relied upon this letter in granting judgment for the appellee5 and *190held that the letter was an admission that the Local intended to pay the death benefits in accordance with the Brotherhood’s Constitution, which permitted the designation of a beneficiary.

The Local’s Constitution and by-laws are silent as to any officer or committee empowered to settle questions of interpretation. However, Article XXXI, Section 1, of that document states that those questions not provided for shall be decided by the Brotherhood’s Constitution. Section 63 (a) of the latter authorizes the General Executive Board of the Brotherhood to decide “all points of law arising under the jurisdiction of the Brotherhood.” This authority is delegated under Section 44(a) to the General President, subject to the approval of the General Executive Board.

It is a generally accepted principle that the construction of these documents is a matter for the union, and the courts will accept the correctness of an interpretation of union rules by those union officials authorized to make such interpretations. English v. Cunningham, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 365, 282 F.2d 848 (1960). Here, the business representative was not an official of the union6 and was not authorized to interpret the rules of the Local. Therefore, the trial court erred in giving judgment to appellee based upon the letter from the business representative.

The Local’s Constitution7 incorporates Section 2 of the Brotherhood’s Constitution, which states that one of its objectives is to raise funds for the benefit of the families of deceased members who were members in good standing at the time of their death.8 The Local’s Constitution 9 was obviously intended to meet that objective. Therefore, payment of death benefits to the children of the decedent was in accord with the Local’s Constitution and by-laws.

Reversed with instructions to enter judgment for appellant.