SEYMOUR et a] v. ANDRADE.

denied, and does not show that all other methods of redress have been pursued without benefit.
Therefore it is considered by the Court that a rule to show cause should be denied, the writ of mandamus be refused and the petition dismissed at petitioner's cost.
The CHIEF JUSTICE concurred.
Writ denied.
BOILLEAU versus BARRIL.
No. 20. Argued July 20, 1906.-DeCided August 8, 1906.
CONTRACT.
Governed by law of state where made and if good there is good anywhere.
EVIDENCE. PLAINTIFF USING DEFENDANT AS WITNESS. Party calling other party as witness is bound by the testimony given.
NOVATION.
In a suit on a note which defendant alleges has been cancelled by other
notes and he can not produce these notes, other evidence is admissible to
prove the cancellation of the first note.
Appeal by defendant from the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit; Hon. F. Mutis Duran, Judge.
The facts appear in the opinion.
J. IMl. Keedy and G. A. Shontz, for appellant. A. Jesurdn, Jr., for respondent.
H. A. GUDGER, J. This is a civil action that was tried in the First Judicial Circuit of the Canal Zone. Judgment was given for the plaintiff in the sum of $650.00 United States currency. Motion for a new trial was made and overruled and the defendant appeals and brings the case to this court for review.
At the trial the plaintiff offered in evidence a written agreement to pay $730.00 United States currency in nine monthly consecutive payments, of $80.00 each, of the first

1906.

21