| Mass. | Jan 30, 1884
The answer, under which the case was tried, did not contain such a special denial of the genuineness of the signature of the note, and demand that it should be proved at the trial, as the Pub. Sts. c. 167, § 21, require. The ruling was wrong in this respect, and we cannot say that it became immaterial in the course of the trial.
Exceptions sustained.