Ball

Action upon a promissory note. The cause was tried without a jury, findings were waived, and judgment entered for plaintiffs. Said appellants appeal from the judgment and from an order denying a new trial.

The complaint alleges that on March 6, 1889, the defendants made their promissory note “in words and figures following:

*136 It is also alleged that plaintiffs are the owners and holders of said note, and that no part of it has been paid except the sum. of two thousand eight hundred and ninety-two dollars and fifty cents, which was paid on March 8, 1889. The complaint was not verified.

The defendants, for a first defense, denied each and every allegation of the complaint; and, for a second and separate defense, set out a detailed history of the circumstances under which the note was made, and, with much less perspicuity, the purposes for which the money represented thereby was intended and was in fact used.

The substance of said second defense is that all the parties to the note were in the city of Sacramento on March 6th; that plaintiffs represented to defendants that they had promised to pay to “certain persons” in said city the sum of six thousand dollars, and were in…