Gilliss

This action was brought to recover upon a promissory note for five hundred dollars made by defendants Wilson and Gilliss to Thomas Eager, the father and assignor of plaintiff. The note was executed for money to be advanced by Eager to Gilliss. Defendant Wilson received no consideration for signing the note, but signed at the request of Eager and as surety for Gilliss. Wilson alleged as a defense that the consideration for the note was a lobbying contract, which was illegal, against public policy, and void.

The court found in favor of Wilson on such affirmative defense.

Thereafter plaintiff proposed a statement on motion for a new trial, which was allowed and settled by the Hon. Edward A. Belcher, the judge who tried the case. The motion came on for hearing before Hon. Thomas F. Graham, the term of the judge who tried the case having expired, and was granted. Prom the order granting a new trial this appeal is taken

It is contended, in support of the action of the court in gra’ big the motion, that the evidence was not sufficient to support the findings and judgment, and that for this reason, if for no other, the order is correct.

This leads us, necessarily, into an examination…