Judgement was entered for the plaintiff on •demurrer to the complaint. The suit was brought on a policy of insurance executed by the defendant to plaintiff’s husband, ■of date March 20, 1902. The policy was made payable to the plaintiff, if living at the time of his death; otherwise, to the legal representative of the insured. The payment of the first ■“semi-annual premium” is acknowledged in the policy. The second semi-annual installment—which by the terms of the contract became due September 20th of the same year—was not paid; and the insured died fifteen days thereafter. The terms of the policy, so far as material, are as follows:—

In view of the express provisions of the contract, the judgment, we think, was unwarranted. By the express terms of the third condition, the policy became void, and the premium paid was forfeited, upon the failure of the insured to pay the second semi-annual premium when it became due. (Joyce on Insurance, sec. 1108; Methvin v. Fidelity Mutual Life Ins. Co., 129 Cal. 251 .) Nor is the ease in any way affected by the provision of the policy conceding “a grace of one month . . . in the payment of the second annual, or any subsequent premium due on the policy.” This provision is explained by the provision in the fifth condition of the policy, that “all premiums are considered payable yearly in advance”; which clearly defines the terms, “the second annual,” and “any subsequent premiums.” Obviously, the provision applies only to the second annual payment (one at the beginning of the second year), and to premiums subsequent thereto.

We advise that the judgment appealed from be reversed and the cause remanded, with directions to the court below to sustain the demurrer to the complaint.

Gray, C., and Chipman, C., concurred.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment appealed from is reversed and the cause remanded, with "directions to the court below to sustain the demurrer to the complaint. McFarland, J., Henshaw, J., Lorigan, J.