Ruth

This is an action on a promissory note for the sum of $2,000, alleged in the complaint to have been executed by the defendant, Lotta Buth Krone, in favor of and payable to the plaintiff.

The cause was tried by a jury and a verdict rendered in favor of the plaintiff for the face of the note, with legal in terest from the date of its maturity, said note, dated June 3, 1903, having been made payable three years after its date, without interest.

Judgment was entered for the plaintiff in accordance with the terms of the verdict.

This appeal is prosecuted from said judgment and from the order denying the defendants a new trial.

The complaint is in the ordinary form of actions for recovery upon promissory notes.

The defendants, by answer, specifically deny the material averments of the complaint, and, moreover, filed a cross-complaint, in which, admitting the execution of the note, they attack the validity of the instrument upon the ground that it is without consideration for its support.

The plaintiff introduced the note in evidence and thereupon rested his case. The note constituted prima facie proof of all that it purported to be. The presumption is that the note was supported…