Plaintiff challenges every material fact found by the trial court as not sustained by the evidence, and especially the finding that the plaintiff was affected with gonorrhea at the time of her marriage and knowingly infected the-defendant therewith. The evidence presents a sharp conflict' as to which spouse was first affected, but the finding made is supported by the defendant’s testimony and some fairly persuasive, though not conclusive, corroborating testimony of a physician to the effect that upon examination of plaintiff before marriage he found a condition that usually indicates^ gonorrhea but not necessarily so, and also a condition that' usually but not necessarily evidences loss of virginity. The' question of the veracity of the parties was peculiarly one for the trial judge and he believed the defendant. From a careful perusal of the evidence we cannot say that he erred in so' doing. The same result is reached as to the other facts found. We cannot say that they are not supported by the evidence.
The question arises whether or not the defendant was entitled to an annulment of the marriage upon the facts found. Our statutes, sec. 2351, sub. 4, provide that a marriage maybe annulled for “fraud, force, or coercion, at the suit of the innocent and injured party, unless the marriage has been confirmed by the acts of the injured party.” The first inquiry arising under the provisions of the statute and the facts
A second question arising upon the facts found is whether the defendant by his conduct confirmed the marriage. The trial court found he did not, and after a careful consideration of all the evidence we cannot say the finding is erroneous. It is undisputed that after the first three or four days subsequent to the marriage and as soon as defendant discovered
By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.'