There was no error in discharging the rule to open the judgment and allow the terr e-ten ant to intervene and defend, as the testimony failed to sustain the allegation that there had been a settlement between the mortgagor and the mortgagee by which the mortgage was paid.

The right of the appellant to have the judgment reduced to the amount actually due on the mortgage is fully protected by the agreement of counsel to credit the payments on the stock.

The judgment is affirmed.