A postal station was established in the Industrial Building, and the contractor was required to transport the mails between it and the various railroad stations and some postal stations. This postal station was constituted as follows:

"Station H was moved May 1, 1893, from its location at No. 156 East Fifty-fourth street into the above-named premises. "Thereafter, on September 1, 1893 (service began October 4, 1893), there was inaugurated in the same premises and in connection with Station H the distribution department, which was variously known as 'Distribution station,' 'Industrial station,' and 'Station H (distribution department),' and the two together were sometimes known as 'Industrial Branch station.'

"Before and after the removal of Station H, as above stated, it was in all respects a branch post office, at which there were collections and deliveries of mail by carriers, distribution of mail matter for dispatch, registration of letters, sale of stamps, and the issuing of money orders.

"Both that part of the industrial branch which had been known as Station H, and that part which was referred to as 'Distribution station,' etc., were situated on the same floor of the Industrial Building, and were at all times connected by a passageway. The former was in charge of a superintendent of station, and the latter was, until January 5, 1895, under the direction of an assistant of the superintendent of mails of the general post office. Station H continued the collection and delivery of mail by carriers, the sale of stamps, the registration of matter, and sale of money orders, while the distribution department had charge of the distribution of second, third and fourth class matter. The collectors for Station H proper carried their collections of mail directly into and deposited them in the distribution department and the distribution for dispatch and the assortment for city delivery were made there. "After the equipment of Industrial Branch station, second class mail matter mailed by publishers and originating north of Fourteenth street was mailed at that station.

"This mail matter had previously been mailed at the general post office and at Station O, at which points the distribution had theretofore been made and dispatch made to the several railroad stations, as specifically stated in the advertisement. Thereafter no further such mailing of second class matter was made at Station O, and all dispatches of said mailed matter for the West and New England States and to and from Grand Central Station were made from the Industrial Branch station, a distance of approximately 6 blocks, instead of from the general post office, 34 miles distant, and from Station O, 13 miles distant, as theretofore.

"The congested state of the general post office on account of lack of adequate space, for the remedy of which Station O had been established some years before, was well known for some time prior to the advertisement and proposal for this service."

The advertisement of September 15, 1892, containing provision for covered regulation wagon, mail messenger, transfer and station service, which was made a part of the contract, undertook to give a schedule of service probably required in the city as the same existed and was in operation on August 15, 1892, as stated in the advertisement, "so that bidders might be as fully advised as possible of the amount of service likely to be required." The advertisement inadvertently stated the service between the Manhattan Elevated Railroad station and the general post office and certain branch stations at one-half of the number of transfers actually required, consequently the Stage Company was required to perform, and did perform, double the number of trips specified.

In the performance of the contract certain foot service was required, which, it is contended, was not included in the contract, which necessitated 479,875 trips going up and down steps in making delivery of mail to messengers on elevated trains, the service requiring the employment of additional men at each station.

From the findings of fact the Court of Claims held the com

plainant entitled to recover the sum of $68,483 as compensation for the additional service under the orders of the department, made necessary by the establishment of the extra service in connection with the Industrial Building, the sum including $9,950.22 expenses incurred by the Stage Company in the matter of ferry tolls; also $14,538 because of the double service. required between the Manhattan Elevated Railroad and the general post office, and certain branch post offices, growing out of the mistake in the advertisement in stating the number of trips required at one-half the actual number. It disallowed the claim for extra compensation on account of the "foot service" required in delivering the mail upstairs at the elevated railway stations. 39 C. Cl., 420, 440.

Mr. Assistant Attorney General Louis A. Pradt and Mr. Joseph Stewart for the United States.

McGo

Mr. A. A. Hoehling, Jr., and Mr. J. H. McGowan for Utah, Nevada and California Stage Company.

MR. JUSTICE DAY, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court.

It is the contention of the Government that, under the authority of the Postmaster General to require new or additional mail messengers or transfer service, without additional compensation, the contractor might be required to perform the additional service made necessary by the establishment of the Industrial Building branch under the authority of the act of Congress of March 3, 1893, 27 Stat. 732, authorizing the renting of the building to be used for general post office purposes in the city of New York. The findings of fact establish that this Industrial Building branch was more than three miles distant from the general post office, and was intended to and did transact nearly all of the business north of Fourteenth street. This necessitated the carrying of the mails not only from the

general post office to the railroad stations, but to and from the branch station established at the Industrial Building. In order to perform this service under the directions of the department, complainant was required to furnish eighty additional horses, more than thirty additional wagons, and from thirtythree to fifty additional men, requiring an additional distance to be travelled in wagons, over and above the normal increase, of 311,939 miles for the period from October 5, 1893, to February 6, 1895, and to pay an increased sum for ferrying the wagons across the North and East Rivers of $9,950.22. Can such enormous increase of the service required and the expense entailed be exacted of a contractor who had agreed to perform new or additional service of the kind specified without additional compensation? There can be no doubt that the purpose of placing this stipulation in the contract was to require the performance, without additional compensation, of new or additional service which might arise from improved methods in the transaction of the business of the Post Office Department and in the increased demand for service resulting from the growth and development of towns and cities. The contract gave to the Postmaster General very considerable discretion in calling for additional service which might result from these causes, without compensation. This was well illustrated in the case of Slavens v. United States, 196 U. S. 229, in which it was held that while the Postmaster General might not order, under such a contract, service of a different character not within the contractual arrangement, he might order, without additional compensation, a change in the service which required. the mail to be taken to and from street cars, met at crossings instead of landings and stations. In that case it happened the burden upon the contractor was not increased. But in the present case we find more service required, amounting to additional mileage of hundreds of thousands of miles, and the payment of a large additional sum of money for ferrying wagons to deliver the mails. There must be some limit to the service which can be required without additional compensation, under

the authority vested in the Postmaster General by the contract, to call for new or additional service of the same character. Otherwise it is within the power of the Government to ruin a contractor by new and wholly unanticipated demands, which caution and prudence, however great, could not have foreseen. If this were a contract between individuals a claim of the right to require this vast amount of additional work-evidently not within the contemplation of the parties-without additional compensation, would hardly be seriously entertained. The same principles of right and justice which prevail between individuals should control in the construction and carrying out of contracts between the Government and individuals. The phrase "new or additional service" is not one of exact meaning, defining the precise extent of the obligation incurred, and permits the court to give it a reasonable construction with a view to doing justice between the parties. In giving a proper construction the court is required to examine the entire contract, to consider the relation of the parties and the circumstances under which it was signed. Rock Island Railway v. Rio Grande Railroad, 143 U. S. 596, 609. It was said by Mr. Justice White, in O'Brien v. Miller, 168 U. S. 287, 297:

"The elementary canon of interpretation is, not that particular words may be isolatedly considered, but that the whole contract must be brought into view and interpreted with reference to the nature of the obligations between the parties, and the intention which they have manifested in forming them. Boardman v. Reed, 6 Pet. 328; Canal Co. v. Hill, 15 Wall. 94." And, upon the same subject, Mr. Justice Bradley, in the case of Canal Co. v. Hill, 15 Wall. 94, 99, said:

"We should look carefully to the substance of the original agreement as contradistinguished from its mere form, in order that we may give it a fair and just construction, and ascertain the substantial intent of the parties, which is the fundamental rule in the construction of all agreements."

We cannot believe it possible that the parties to this contract contemplated the establishment of a new postal depart