Written Contract — Pleading — Presumption — Answer.—Where an ■ agreement is required to be in writing, it is sufficient in pleading to allege the agreement, it being presumed that the agreement alleged will he proved to be in writing; and this rule of pleading applies not only to the complaint, but also to an answer which alleges an agreement by way of defense.

Id.—Promissory Note—Written Agreement as to Collateral Securities—Foreclosure—■ Defense to Personal Liability — Judgment upon Pleadings fop. Deficiency.—In an action to foreclose mortgage bonds pledged by the defendant as maker of a promissory note as collateral security for its payment, where the verified answer pleaded by waj' of defense to any personal liability, and to any deficiency judgment upon the note, that it was agreed prior to the giving of the note and securities that plaintiff would rely upon and look to the securities alone, and that no further personal or general liability or judgment should be sought or obtained, the pleading of such agreement is sufficient to admit proof of a written agreement to that effect; and it is error to grant a judgment upon the pleadings, so as to include a deficiency judgment against the defendant.

Id.—Failure of Proof—Written Agreement to Protect Security— Conclusive Presumption—Parol Evidence Inadmissible.—Where the only written agreement proved in addition to the note did not contain the agreement alleged in the answer, hat showed an agreement for security of the note, and that if the securities pledged deteriorated in value, defendant should reduce the note in proportion to the deterioration, or give additional security, it must he conclusively presumed that the whole engagement of the parties and the extent and manner of their undertaking were reduced to writing; and parol evidence is inadmissible to vary the written agreement by proof of an oral agreement such as was alleged in the answer.