The liability of defendant, as surety, is contractual and is determined by the conditions of the bond. Burgess v. Ward (1934) 169 Okla. 13, 35 P.2d 880. The bond simply requires, as a condition precedent to liability for reasonable rental value, that a judgment be rendered against the tenants on appeal. We take this to mean a valid and final judgment.

The gist of these cases seems to be that section 585, O. S. 1931, 12 Okla. St. Ann. § 1073, providing that an order to revive an action against the representatives or successors of a defendant shall not be made without their consent, unless in one year from the time it could have been first made, except as otherwise provided by law, is not exclusive and that in proper cases the court may in its discretion allow revivor after the one-year period. The defendants in error rely upon Hester v. Gilbert, 43 Okla. 400, 143 P. 189; Glazier v. Heneybuss, 19 Okla. 316, 91 P. 872; Chouteau v. Hoss et al., 118 Okla. 76, 246 P. 844; Raff v. State, 48 Kan. 44, 28 P. 986; Farmers State Bank of Clarita v. Williamson, 151 Okla. 105, 1 P.2d 377; Hollins v. Hollins, 160 Okla. 197, 16 P.2d 574; Burgess v. Ward et al., 169 Okla. 13, 35 P.2d 880; Drew v. Thurlwell, 173 Okla. 405, 48 P.2d 1066, and other authorities. We have also examined the cases of Thompson v. Bristow, 116 Okla. 243, 244 P. 429; Kilgore v. Yarnell, 24 Okla. 525, 103 P. 698; Edwards v. Asher, 95 Okla. 39, 217 P. 869, and others.