going facts were averred, but no averment or contention was made that the so-called "executory judgment" which plaintiff had theretofore obtained constituted res adjudicata as to the question now in issue.

The defendant (appellant herein) put in an answer, setting up various facts unnecessary to be here adverted to.

He also averred that under section eleven of the act of Congress, above mentioned, he had the right to pay the instalments due on the mortgage, in American money, at the established rate of sixty cents in the coin of the United States for one peso of Porto Rican coin.

The trial court, in its judgment, after reciting the existence of the executory judgment in the action above described and also all the proceedings in the case before it, decreed the payment of the interest or instalments which might then be due, or thereafter to grow due, to the plaintiff, in United States coin at the rate of one dollar thereof for each peso of indebtedness. Basing its decree wholly upon the literal language of the contract, the court said: "It appears that Don Juan Serralles y Colon bound himself to make the payments to said Cartagena, by virtue of the said contract of sale, in money current in commerce, of whatever coinage it may be, at the rate of one hundred cents of the current money for each peso, it is plain and evident that the heirs of said Serralles are bound to pay in dollars all the instalments arising from the same contract, or the interest on the same, for dollars are the money current at present in this island."

An appeal was taken by the defendant to the Supreme Court on the ground, among others, that the judgment of the District Court violated Articles 1281 and 1283 of the Civil Code. The articles are as follows:

"ART. 1281. If the terms of a contract are clear and leave no doubt as to the intentions of the contracting parties, the literal sense of the stipulations shall be observed.

"If the words should appear contrary to the evident intention of the contracting parties, the intention shall prevail.

"ART. 1283. However general the terms of a contract may be, there should not be understood as included therein things and cases different from those with regard to which the persons interested intended to contract."

Further ground of appeal was the alleged violation of the eleventh section of the act of Congress above mentioned, under which appellant claimed the right to pay in United States coin at the equivalent value of sixty cents for each peso.

The Supreme Court, in due time, after argument, affirmed the judgment of the court below on the law, holding that the contract was clear, and its literal terms must be complied with. It did not, nor did the District Court, hold the prior judgment to be res adjudicata.

The court also denied the right claimed by the defendant, under the above-mentioned act of Congress, to pay his indebtedness at the rate of sixty cents of American money for each peso of such indebtedness, on the ground that the act did not apply to such cases as the one before the court.

Mr. James S. Harlan for appellants.

There was no brief for appellees.

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

The question arises herein whether this court has jurisdiction to hear the case, upon appeal or otherwise. The action is one to recover the interest due, on an indebtedness from the appellant to the appellee, on account of the purchase by the former of a certain interest in a plantation in Porto Rico, owned by the testator of appellee, which indebtedness was secured by a mortgage. This action is in its nature something like one to foreclose a mortgage. The question arising in the case is in regard to the kind of money in which the indebtedness of appellant (both that due at the time of the commencement of the

action and that accruing thereafter) should be paid, the appellee asserting her right to be paid in American money at the rate of one dollar for each peso of indebtedness, while the appellant, on the contrary, asserts his right, under section eleven of the act of Congress of April 12, 1900, already mentioned, to pay the indebtedness in money or coins of the United States, at the rate of sixty cents in such coins for each peso of his indebtedness. This right was denied by the court below on the ground that there was a clear contract to pay as demanded by the appellee, and that the act of Congress had no application to the case. Judgment was accordingly given in favor of the appellee, that the appellant should pay to the appellee the indebtedness due or thereafter to grow due to her, at the rate of one dollar in American money for each peso of his indebtedness. Appellant thus claimed a right under a statute of the United States, which was denied, and under section thirty-five of the Foraker Act (April 12, 1900), this court has jurisdiction to review the judgment. Crowley v. United States, 194 U. S. 461; Rodriguez v. United States, 198 U. S. 156.

The record also shows that a prior action had been commenced by appellee, in a municipal court of Porto Rico, between the same parties, to recover an instalment of interest due September 15, 1900, and that the same defense was there made in regard to the character of the money in which the debt should be paid. The municipal court in that case decided in favor of the appellee herein, and judgment to that effect having been duly entered, an appeal therefrom was taken to the District Court, which affirmed the judgment, and the same was thereupon paid by the appellant herein. That judgment is not set up by the appellee as res adjudicata, and while it is recited in the judgments in this case both in the District and Supreme Courts as having been recovered, it is not held to be such by either of the courts, but in such judgments it is referred to as an "executory judgment," and by Article 1477 of the Porto Rico "Law of Civil Procedure" (page 299) it is provided that "Judgments rendered in executory actions shall not give rise

to the exception of res judicata, the parties reserving their rights to institute the ordinary action on the same question." As the courts below have treated and denominated the prior judgment in the municipal court as an "executory judgment, obtained in an executory action, the reason for not holding the judgment to be res adjudicata becomes apparent when the above article of the code is considered.

We come, then, to a consideration of the proper construction of the provisions in the two deeds, regarding the kind of money in which the debt is to be paid. They are set forth in the foregoing statement and are substantially alike, excepting that the first deed, that of September, 1894, in speaking of the coinage, says, that the payment is to be made in money that is in circulation or is accepted in the province, at the rate of one hundred centavos (cents) of the money in circulation for each peso, and in the amended deed of October 6, 1894, the translator of the original Spanish leaves out the word "centavos," and gives what he regards as its proper translation, the word "cents," so that the provision reads that the money is to be paid at the rate of one hundred "cents" of the circulating medium for each peso. These two deeds represented the same transaction and were drawn, of course, in the Spanish language. In the first deed the interest of the children of Cartagena was not referred to, because of the mistaken assumption that Cartagena had the whole title, and upon discovering the mistake the second deed was made, conveying his interest and the interest of his children, amounting to one-eighteenth of the whole value of the plantation, as conveyed by that deed to the same purchaser. The later deed was regarded by all parties as a mere rectification and ratification of the first deed, and it is quite clear that the word "centavos," contained in the first deed, was used in both, and that the word "cents" is but a translation of the original Spanish word "centavos," which was used in this contract drawn in the Spanish language.

This is in truth assumed to be correct by counsel in the court below, in his communication to that court in behalf of the pres

ent appellee (which forms part of the record herein), as he there uses the word "cents," and then follows it by the use of the word "centavos."

It may be, therefore, stated as a fact that the original contract in the deeds provided for the payment in money current in the province at the rate of one hundred centavos for each peso. There is no finding in so many words, as to the value of the peso mentioned in the contract. The Spanish word centavo is said to be, in Spanish and in South American countries, a small copper or nickel coin, in value six-tenths of a cent (actual), and one cent (nominal); the one-hundreth of a peso. See Standard Dictionary of the English language. The centavo being worth really six-tenths of a cent, and being the onehundreth part of a peso, would, of course, make the peso worth sixty cents in American money.

The eleventh section of the act of Congress, already mentioned, provides for the redemption of all silver coins of Porto Rico known as the peso, and all other copper and Porto Rican coins in circulation in Porto Rico "at the present established rate of sixty cents in the coins of the United States for one peso of Porto Rican coin, and for all minor and subsidiary coins the same rate of exchange shall be applied." The Congress thus fixed the rate of exchange in the redemption of these coins, and it must be assumed to have been fixed at the value of the peso in American coin.

From these facts it appears to us that there is no rational doubt that at the time when this contract was executed the peso in circulation in Porto Rico was worth not to exceed sixty cents, American money. At the time when the money was due under the contract, in September, 1900, it is admitted that all the pesos and centavos theretofore in circulation had been at that time redeemed by the United States, pursuant to the provisions of the act of Congress, and the money in circulation in Porto Rico was then and thereafter the money of the United States. This was the money current in commerce in Porto Rico and was in circulation and accepted therein as such money. It