Cascaden

(after stating the facts as above).

In the complaint it was alleged that certain difficulties arose between McCarty and the defendant, and that for the purpose of settling and adjusting said difficulties the defendant applied to the plaintiff for the' reduction of the option price in the plaintiff’s agreement with McCarty by the sum'of $5,000. The defendant moved that the plaintiff be required to make his complaint more definite and certain, and to set forth the nature of the difficulties between defendant and McCarty. The motion was denied, and that ruling is assigned as error. It is not shown, nor can it be deduced from anything in the record, that the denial of the motion prejudiced the defendant in any way. The difficulties which he had with McCarty were within his own knowledge, and it is not shown that he was taken by surprise by the evidence which was adduced. After the opening statements of counsel for the plaintiff, the defendant asked for a continuance on the ground that matter had been brought out that had not been anticipated, and he was granted a continuance for the time he asked for. The motion was addressed to the sound discretion of the court below, and it is…