ing them the 40 which had the improvements on it and left the will in the bank. He also said he would make them a deed and leave it at the bank. When he spoke about making a will he talked about leaving the complainant and her husband an amount of money equal to the value of the 72 acres. Fifty-five acres of the farm were to go to Mrs. Howe. Complainant and her husband agreed to move to the Crawley farm. They paid rent for it.

Complainant testified, but her testimony was objected to, and it is not now insisted by her counsel that she was a competent witness.

After defendant had taken testimony before the master, complainant offered further testimony as to the value of the farm and of statements made by Thomas Crawley; also as to his health, physical condition and the care and attention he required.

Mrs. Niles, who conducted a hotel in Tuscola, testified that Thomas Crawley was cross and disagreeable. He occasionally stopped at her hotel but she was never at the farm. She would not have the care of him for less than $100 per month.

Emma McCoy, a nurse, testified she had nursed Thomas Crawley before his wife died and had frequently been at his house before his son, Frank, died. He was a good man but selfish and cross. Witness would not take care of him for less than $25 or $30 a week. About six years before Frank died, witness asked Crawley why he did not fix his place up. He said he did not expect to live very long, and when he died there would be plenty for Frank to fix up the place and for Minnie to build a little home on her place.

Dr. Reat testified he had known Thomas Crawley forty or fifty years. He was ill one time after his return from the State Fair, in 1917, and witness attended him in Tuscola. He was afterwards taken out to his farm and witness attended him there. He told witness a year or more before that illness that he intended to divide his farm be

tween his children. During the doctor's visits to him during the illness referred to, he reminded the doctor of that conversation and said he had divided the farm and given Frank the home place; that he did not intend to change it, as he expected to make his home there. He said J. M. Merica prepared the papers.

J. M. Merica, a lawyer, testified he prepared a will for Thomas Crawley in 1915, and a deed, he believed, in 1916. There were two deeds,-one to Frank and one to his sister. He thought the deed to Frank was for the home 40. He did not know what became of the deeds.

S. C. Scheideman testified he lived near Thomas Crawley and had a conversation with him a short time before his son and wife moved back to the farm. Crawley said the place was not like home to him and he was to see Frank and his wife and ask them to come back to the farm. In a subsequent conversation he said he had deeded them half the farm and hoped they would stay there, and he would like to see Frank pitch in and buy the other half from Mrs. Howe. He said he had deeded Frank and wife the part where the improvements were and would make up the difference to Mrs. Howe in money.

Elizabeth Hurst testified she was a sister of complainant and knew Thomas Crawley the last two years of his life. She visited his son and wife at the farm frequently. Crawley was childish. If Frank and wife wanted any painting, papering or fixing up done he would tell them the place was theirs and they could fix it up to suit themselves. Witness would not board and keep him for less than $30 or $35 per week.

The defendant introduced in evidence checks drawn by Thomas Crawley during the time complainant and her husband resided on the farm. One was to the F. H. Jones Lumber Company for lumber, amounting to about $250; also checks given the complainant by Crawley aggregating $174.15, and a check from Belle Crawley to Thomas Craw

ley, April 23, 1918, for $62; also a lease to Harry Smith of the farm, made by Thomas Crawley, dated October 15, 1917, leasing the premises from March 1, 1918, to March I, 1919, for the consideration of $950. Harry Smith moved on the farm pursuant to the lease, and his sister, the complainant, remained with him there. Crawley remained on the farm and occupied the same furniture and room until the corn was gathered, when he went south. Defendant also introduced in evidence a letter written by Frank Crawley to his sister, Mrs. Howe, February 8, 1916, in which he stated that a Mr. Hilgenberg was going to rent his farm and wanted him to take it. He asked what his sister and her husband thought about it. He said if he rented it he would expect to farm the home place, and if he moved to the Hilgenberg place he would get some young married man to work for him and live at the home place. He requested that nothing be said to his father about it, and said he would be farming before his father got back and he could not help himself that year. He complained of the condition of the house and barn on the home place. He repeatedly asked that nothing be said to his father concerning the matter, "for I am not expecting much when he is done with it anyhow. 'Nough said."

John Crawley, nephew of Thomas Crawley, testified he lived in Indiana. In June, 1916, Frank visited him and they had a conversation about Thomas Crawley's land. Witness lived with his mother on land she had a life estate in. He told Frank he did not feel like fixing up the place, and Frank said it was the same way with him,-that he did not feel like fixing up his father's place as he did not know that he would ever get it. He said nothing about any arrangement with his father about his staying on the farm.

Sarah Blake, cousin of Frank Crawley, testified she had a talk with complainant at the farm shortly after the funeral of Thomas Crawley. She said if Frank had lived they would not be living on the home place; that they in

tended to buy a farm in Indiana and live there. Complainant said she did not then know what she would do; that she would probably move to Tuscola and take rooms.

Mrs. Loman, niece of Thomas Crawley, testified she lived in Iowa; that she attended his funeral and remained about four weeks, visiting around; that she visited complainant and talked with her about Crawley and his dealings; that complainant asked witness if she thought Crawley left a will; that she said he had paid his board and she had planned to use the board money and money she received for butter for Frank and herself to spend a winter in Florida. She said Crawley paid $4 a week board and let them have the pasture rent for $3 an acre.

Henry Rahn testified he lived just across the road from the complainant and her husband when they lived on the Thomas Crawley farm; that in 1916 Frank said he was going to leave the farm; that in the spring of 1917 he said that was his last year there; that he was going to Indiana.

Charles Howe, brother-in-law of Mrs. Howe, testified that in January, 1917, he was selling automobiles in Tuscola; that he had a conversation with Frank Crawley about buying a car; that Frank said he had no place to keep one; that he would not build a place because the farm was not his. Witness told him it probably would be, and he said he had no assurance of that.

It was stipulated by counsel that Amelia Rahn, who was sick, would, if present, testify that she lived just across the road from Frank Crawley from March, 1913, until after his death; that at her house, a short time before Frank's death, complainant said they were not going to stay another year on Crawley's farm; that he charged them $4 per acre privilege rent and was boarding it out, and that she did not think that was fair.

Upon the question of the physical condition of Thomas Crawley and his ability to take care of himself, Dr. Reat testified he had been his physician for something like forty

years; that he spent his winters in the South; that he had hardening of the arteries and vertigo; that he was able to be about and come to town and transact ordinary business, but in the doctor's opinion he ran a risk every time he went up or down stairs; that he was a kind man in disposition, quiet and orderly.

J. R. Cantrall lived in Tuscola and had known Thomas Crawley twenty-five years. Crawley occasionally visited the witness in his office and he saw him in the South in 1907. Witness thought him in good health for one of his age from 1913 to 1918. He was able to get around and take care of himself very well. He was genial and kind.

Charles Jackson lived a half a mile from the Crawley home and saw Crawley nearly every day. He was about the farm most all of the time, working a good deal, fixing it up, setting fence posts, husking and hauling corn. He was not quarrelsome and always seemed pleasant.

Henry Rahn testified to seeing Thomas Crawley working on the farm, fixing fences and hauling corn. He considered him a kind, pleasant man and never heard anyone say the contrary.

A number of other acquaintances of Thomas Crawley testified he always seemed kind and pleasant, and several of them testified that it was worth from $4 to $5 per week to board him.

The foregoing, we believe, is the substance of the most material testimony on the question of the alleged contract and its performance. We have attempted to set it out pretty fully, which renders it unnecessary to comment upon it at length.

The law governing the questions here raised is well settled. The question to be determined is whether a contract and its performance by the promisees in this case is sufficiently proved to warrant decreeing specific performance. It may be conceded the testimony shows Thomas Crawley intended his son, Frank, and his wife, to have the home 40