In this case, because of the uncertainty and ambiguity of a part of the contract, the true construction thereof, in the light of the intent and meaning of the parties thereto, was a question for the jury, under a proper charge by the court. The evidence was conflicting, but the verdict was authorized, and met with the approval of the trial judge. There being no error of law in the trial of the ease, the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.