
    Walsh v. The St. Louis Exposition & Music Hall Association, Plaintiff in Error.
    
    Contract: interpretation : architects. Under a written proposition made to certain architects for plans and specifications of a certain proposed building, . under the terms of which proposition each architect should receive the sum of five hundred dollars for his plans, irrespective of relative merit, and which contained the further clause that: “The architect who is successful shall not' receive five hundred dollars, but he shall he engaged as architect and superintendent, and shall he paid,” etc., the architect whose plans are accepted as the most meritorious of all has a right of action for refusal to employ him as architect and superintendent.
    
    
      Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals.
    
    Aeeibmed.
    Boyle, Adams & MoKeiglian and S. B. Jones for plaintiff in error.
    
      Klein & Eisse for defendant in error.
    
      
       This syllabus is taken from 16 Mo. App. 502.
    
   Pee Cueiam. —

The judgment of the St, Lonis court of appeals, reversing that of the circuit court and re. manding the cause, is hereby affirmed on the grounds and for the reasons stated in the opinion of said court which is reported in 16 Mo. App. 502.  