Noah Haynes Swayne

“ The parties will be placed as they would have stood if the mistake had not occurred. [1]
The party alleging the mistake must show exactly in what it consists, and the correction that should be made. The evidence must be such as to leave no reasonable doubt upon the mind of the court as to either of these points. [2] The mistake must be mutual and common to both parties to the instrument. It must appear that both have done what neither intended. [3] A mistake on one side may be a ground for rescinding, but not for reforming, a contract. ”

“ The principle of the admission of such testimony is that the court may be placed, in regard to the surrounding circumstances, as nearly as possible in the situation of the parties-the question being, what did they mean by the language they employed? [13] What is implied is as effectual as what is expressed. [14] The expression and the implication in this case are equally clear. It is expressed that the vessel should proceed to a port in Cuba, and thence to Europe. ”

“ Usage is admissible to explain an ambiguity, but it is never received to contradict what is plain in a written contract. [8] If the words employed have an established legal meaning, parol evidence that the parties intended to use them in a different sense will be rejected, unless if interpreted according to their legal acceptation, they would be insensible with reference to the context or the extrinsic facts. [9] If no such consequence is involved, proof of usage is wholly inadmissible to contradict or in any wise to vary their effect. ”