
    John Brown v. Frank D. Richardson and E. Richardson.
    1. Findings—On Conflicting Evidence.—Findings of fact by the judge Of the trial court sitting as a chancellor, upon oral evidence, will not be disturbed unless clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.
    Mortgage Foreclosure.—Trial in the Circuit Court of Jasper County; the Hon. Silas Z. Landes, Judge, presiding. Hearing and decree for defendant. Error by complainant.
    Heard in this court at the February term, 1898.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed August 31, 1898.
    
      Gibson & Johnson, attorneys for plaintiff in error.
    Fithian, Davidson & Kasserman, T. J. Fithian and I. D. Shamhart, attorneys for defendants in error.
   Hr. Justice Worthington

delivered the opinion of the court.

This action was brought to foreclose a mortgage securing a promissory note for $500. Defendants in error claim that the note is paid. Plaintiff in error denies payment. This is the only issue in the case. The testimony is squarely conflicting. It would serve no useful purpose to review or analyze it. There is abundant evidence to sustain the finding of the chancellor that the note has been paid if the witnesses who testified to its payment told the truth. He saw and heard them, and for this reason was better qualified to pass upon their testimony than we are. Findings of facts by the chancellor upon oral evidence will not be disturbed unless clearly against the preponderance of evidence. Burgett et al. v. Osborne et al., 172 Ill. 227.

Judgment affirmed.  