Cowan

Appeal from an order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial.

Plaintiff sued defendants, as mining partners, to recover for services alleged to have been rendered as superintendent of their mine.

The complaint contains two counts. In the first he avers that he performed labor for defendants between certain dates at their request, and that said services are reasonably worth $3,050, of which amount defendants have paid $650 only, leaving $2,400 still unpaid.

In the second count he avers an express contract, by which defendants agreed that if plaintiff would take charge of their mine, pump out the water so that it could be worked, and thereafter manage, work, and mine it, they .would pay him the salary usually paid to mining engineers and superintendents, which he avers was reasonably worth three hundred dollars per month, and in case he succeeded in keeping the water out for six months, they would pay him a further sum, as a bonus, of one thousand dollars.

The defendants, answering separately, deny specifically each allegation in the complaint, except that they admit that plaintiff performed certain service for them, but not as a mining superintendent; that the service…