Rawlinson

This action was brought to recover the sum of five hundred dollars and interest. On a trial before the court without a jury the plaintiff obtained a judgment for the full amount sued on. The defendant appeals from the judgment and from an order denying it a new trial.

The first point made by appellant for a reversal is, that the demurrer to the first count of the complaint should have been sustained because there was not a sufficient allegation of nonpayment in said count. The allegation in question reads as follows: “V. That defendant has not paid said sum of five hundred dollars, nor any part thereof, but the same is, with interest thereon from June 10, 1899, till paid, still due in United States gold coin and wholly unpaid.”

It is difficult to conceive of a more complete allegation of non-payment. Appellant’s first point, therefore, is certainly ■devoid of any merit whatever. Moreover, the appellant seems to misunderstand the allegation in question. In its brief a portion of the allegation is set forth as the whole, and on this appellant argues its insufficiency. We are unable to discover .any defect in the first count of the complaint.

Appellant’s second point is directed…