“Or” does not mean and

Ct.Cl. 1878. The word “or” in a contract will not be construed to mean “and,” where it connects propositions reasonably in the alternative. Thus, the word in a contract which binds the contractor to supply so many pounds, more or less, as may be required for the wants of certain government stations between a certain time, cannot be construed to mean “and,” and does not entitle the constractor to furnish all the oats which may be needed at the station.—Merriam v. U.S., 14 Ct.Cl. 289, affirmed 2 S.Ct. 536, 107 U.S. 437, 17 Otto 437, 27 L.Ed. 531.