
    Day v. Randolph.
    1. Verdict: rinding or pacts by court treated as. Where the evidence as to a fact involved in a law action tried to the court is conflicting, the finding, like the verdict of a jury, will not be disturbed on appeal.
    
      Appeal from Polk Ci/reuit Court.
    
    Friday, April 25.
    Action to recover for money advanced by plaintiff to defendant upon a contract to sell and deliver to the plaintiff four thousand bushels of good yellow corn. The plaintiff avers that he paid the defendant upon the contract one thousand dollars; that the defendant commenced delivering corn, but did not deliver the quality of corn called for by the contract, and refused to deliver any other. There was a trial to the court without a j tyy, and a finding that the corn was not of the quality called for by the contract. The court rendered judgment for the plaintiff for the money paid, less the value of the corn delivered. The defendant appeals.
    
      L. G. Banister, for appellant.
    
      Kourse <& Kauffman, for appellee.
   Adams, J.

The defendant assigns as error that the finding in respect to the quality of the corn is not supported by the evidence. As to the quality the plaintiff testified in these words: “The corn he (Randolph) had thrown into the crib and that he had on the wagon was a mixed lot of corn; there was some white and some yellow. There was from five to eight bushels of it damaged. I saw that four or five or six bushels of it was not merchantable. 1 sorted it out a day or two afterwards myself, and I judged that from five to seven bushels of it was not merchantable.”

While there was other evidence tending strongly to show that the corn was good, it cannot be denied that there was evidence tending to support the finding; and, such being the case, the judgment must be

Affirmed.  