No. 36—2432.

#### Cothran v. Ellis.

This was an action in assumpsit upon a promissory note for §10,000, made by plaintiff in error, payable to the order of Smith, McCormick & Co., and by them indorsed to the defendants in error. On the trial the general issue was withdrawn, and the case was tried upon the issues presented by several special pleas filed by the plaintiff in error, which set up that the only cause of action was the consideration of the note sued on, and that said note was given to the payees named therein for an amount won by said payees at gaming, and by trading in differences on the Board of Trade of the city of Chicago; that the note was given for losses that were sustained as a result of trades that were to be settled on differences alone, etc. There was a direct conflict of evidence on the issues thus presented, and it can not be said that the verdict rendered for defendants in error is not fairly supported by the evidence.

There being no error in the record, judgment is affirmed.

Opinion filed Dec. 8, 1886.

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Judge below, Elliott Anthony. Attorneys, for plaintiff in error, Mr. Francis A. Riddle ; for defendants in error, Messrs. Trumbull, Washbuene & Robbins and Mr. S. S. Gregory.