
    Simpson v. Currier & a.
    
    In a suit against sureties, upon a note for $1,000, evidence that at the time they signed it, it was agreed that the plaintiff should furnish the principal an additional sum of $3,000, and that when that was furnished the note for $1,000 should be given up, and the plaintiff should take a note signed by the principal, including both sums, secured by mortgage, is incompetent as tending to vary the written contract.
    Assumpsit, to recover the amount of a note for $1,000, signed by the defendants as sureties for one A. A. Currier.
    Subject to the plaintiff’s exception, tbe defendants were permitted to introduce evidence that the defendants signed the note in suit as sureties, on the understanding and condition that tbe plaintiff should loan the principal $3,000 more, and that then the note in suit sliould be taken up and the plaintiff sliould take a note for $4,000, secured only by a mortgage of tbe house of the wife of tbe principal. When the principal delivered the note in suit to the plaintiff, they had the same understanding and agreement. About a week after, tbe principal carried to the plaintiff a note for $4,000, and a mortgage duly executed, securing the note, which the plaintiff declined to receive, and, without the knowledge or consent of the defendants, took a note of $8,000 and a mortgage securing that, retaining the note for $1,000 in suit. The defendants had a verdict, which the plaintiff moved to set aside.
    
      
      A. W. Sawyer and Wadleigh, for the plaintiff.
    
      Gr. Y Sawyer and Sulloway, Topliff O’ Connor, for the defendants.
   Stanley, J.

Ver diet set aside.

Allen, J., did not sit: the others concurred.)  