Hammell

Appeal from judgment and from an order refusing a new trial.

One Wilkins owned land at Azusa; Goldsberry, a tract at Clearwater. They agreed to exchange lands. Goldsberry was to convey his tract clear of encumbrance and give $2,000 difference—the $2,000 to be secured by a mortgage on the Azusa property which he was to get from Wilkins. It was found that his land was mortgaged to one Tring for $830; and Goldsberry, to pay this, agreed to mortgage the Azusa tract for $830 more, and Wilkins assented to the change. Wilkins owed plaintiff about $3,500, which was secured on the Azusa tract. Plaintiff consented to take, in lieu of this security, whatever Wilkins received in exchange. Accordingly, when the trade was consummated, Wilkins assigned the notes and mortgage which he received from Goldsberry to plaintiff, as collateral security, and also had the Clear-water tract conveyed to a trustee, also as security for his indebtedness to plaintiff. Subsequently Goldsberry paid both of his notes, and they were credited upon Wilkins’ indebtedness. It appears incidentally—although neither party seems to think the circumstance of any importance—that plaintiff had assigned Wilkins’ note with…