It was alleged by the defendants, a number of farmers, that their names were secured in a book, by reason of representations made by an agent of the horse importer that they were signing a call for a meeting of farmers to consider the matter of buying a stallion for $5,000, and that when twenty names were secured a meeting would be called. The names were secured and the meeting called, but instead of being asked to consider the matter of buying the horse the signers were informed that they had already agreed to buy the horse and jointly and severally pay $5,000 for him in four equal yearly payments, the first payment to be in two years, with six per cent. interest on all payments. In a proof of this it was shown that a brief contract in small type was printed at the top of the page of the book in which the names were signed which bound the signers as alleged. Upon this revelation the meeting became the opposite of one called to consider the purchase of the horse, as may be readily imagined. The evidence shows that the defendants either did not know there was any printing matter on the page they signed, or if they did see it did not read it, and were told by the agent that it had nothing to do with the matter under consideration, or to be exact, one farmer testified: “I looked the thing over: I noticed this contract at the head of it and I asked what that fine print was there. He (the agent) said that it was an Iowa contract and did not cut any figure in this State.” Another explanation was testified to by another witness, quoted further on. Some witnesses testified that a broad rubber band or a turned leaf concealed the contract. The agent testified that he did not call any of the defendants’ attention to the contract, didn’t know if they saw it, but “supposed they did, for they had the book in their hands.” All the defendants testified that they would not have signed the book if they had known the contract was there. Regarding the matter of what the meeting was to be called for, one farmer testified as follows, and he was corroborated by the other witnesses for the defense, and by at least one witness for the plaintiffs: “Question: State what that conversation was, what he (the agent) said and what you said.”