Holt

This is an action to foreclose a mortgage. The defendants demurred to the complaint, *159 and their demurrer was overruled. They failed to answer within the time allowed, and thereupon judgment was entered against them, from which they appeal.

The demurrer was upon the grounds of ambiguity and uncertainty, and it specified three particulars wherein it was claimed that the complaint was defective.

The first specification is, that it does not appear whether the indorsements on the promissory note, set forth in the complaint, were part of the note at the time of its execution, or afterwards written thereon, or whether the said note is a copy of the note executed by the defendants.

The complaint alleges that the defendants executed their promissory note to the plaintiff on December 24, 1888, payable three months after date, “ which note is in the words and figures following, to wit and then sets forth a copy of the note, with the following words and figures after the signatures:—

It is argued for appellants that the words and figures following the signatures appear, according to the averment, to have been a component part of the note, and yet that they show three dates, all later…