(N.   S.)    22.^


PART  IV

Interpretation  of  the  Contract
CHAPTER  I

EVIDENCE    RELATING    TO    THE    CONTRACT

§  125.  In  General.  A  contract  may  be  wholly  in  writing,
or  wholly  by  word  of  month,  or  partly  in  writing  and  partly
by  word  of  mouth,  or  may  be  implied  from  the  conduct  of
the  parties.  But  if  the  contract  be  one  Avithin  the  Statute
of  Frauds,  all  of  it  must  be  in  wi'iting.^

Tf  the  contract  is  oral,  it  is  the  province  of  the  Jui'y  in
the  event  of  a  controversy  to  decide  what  tonus  were  actually
agTeed  upon  by  the  jiarties.^  If  it  is  alleged  that  the  agree-
ment was  in  writing,  then  that  fact  must  be  proved.  When
a  written  contract  was  signed  by  only  one  of  the  parties,  and
was  acted  on  by  both,  it  is  admissible  in  evidpuce  as  their
agreement.^

Parol  evidence  is  admissible  to  show  that  an  instrument
(if  wi-iting  signed  by  the  parties  and  in  form  a  complete  con-
tract, was  not  intended  by  them  to  be  binding  or  was  made
upon  a  condition."'  The  real  iigTeement  which  plaintiff's
agent  and  the  defendant  made  by  parol  Avas  that  plaintiff

1  Fisher  v.  Andrews,  94  Md.  46.
2  Roberts  v.  Bonaparte,  73  Md.  191.
3  Western  Md.  K.  Co.  v.  OberndorfC,  37  Md.  281 ;  Allen  v.  Sowerby,
37  Md.  410.
*  Burke  v.  Dulaney,  153  U.  S.  234;  Reynolds  v.  Robinson,  110  N.
Y.  654 ;  Adams  v.  Morgan,  150  Mass.  148 ;  Donaldson  v.  Uhlfelder,  21
D.  C.  App.  489.
