The contract sued on clearly appears upon its face to have been intended to be a continuing guaranty. Bent v. Hartshorn, 1 Met. 24. Hatch v. Hobbs, 12 Gray, 447. Boston & Sandwich Glass Co. v. Moore, 119 Mass. 435. The question of fact of extinguishment or discharge has been decided by the court below in favor of the plaintiffs.

Exceptions overruled.