¶1said there was no doubt as to the construction of the instrument, which must speak for itself. It cannot be varied by any such usage if proved. If it is matter of law the court are to decide it. If matter of fact it cannot be admitted to explain an instrument in itself not ambiguous.
¶2[Upon the trial a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, and a new trial being asked for. on the ground of a miscalculation of damages by the jury, it was refused. Case No. 7,977.]