Baxter

This action was brought to recover three hundred and ninety-one dollars and ninety-three cents for services performed hy plaintiff in threshing wheat and barley for defendant.

The complaint was not verified, and the answer was a general denial of its allegations.

The cause was tried hy the court, written findings filed, and judgment rendered thereon as prayed for in the complaint.

The appeal is from the final judgment, was taken within sixty days after rendition of iudgment, and is supported hy a bill of exceptions.

The testimony was conflicting. There was testimony tending to show the following state of facts:

Plaintiff and one Flanigan owned a threshing-machine and were engaged as partners in threshing grain for farmers. Said Flanigan and defendant were also partners in the crop of grain threshed.

Flanigan arranged with defendant for the threshing, and each of them was to pay separately for one-half of the threshing. Plaintiff and Flanigan then agreed that they would not thresh the crop as copartners, but that the pay coming from defendant should all go to plaintiff, and that Flanigan’s grain should be threshed for him free to offset the other half.

It did not appear that…