The defense of duress must be made by specific allegations setting up the facts which amount to duress. A general denial is not sufficient.1 The burden of proof is upon the party who claims the existence of duress.2• The burden of proving duress is upon the party who alleges it.3 It is said that the existence of duress must be proved by a clear preponderance of the evidence.4

18Foote v. De Poy, 126 la. 366, 106 Am. St. Rep. 365, 102 N. W. 112.

19 Wilson v. Calhoun, 170 la. Ill, 151 N. W. 1087; Hoag v. Hoag, 210 Mass. 94, 36 L. R. A. (N.S.) 329, 96 N. E. 49.

20 Hoag v. Hoag, 210 Mass. 94, 36 L. R. A. (N.S.) 329, 96 N. E. 49.

1 Nordholt v. Nordholt, 87 Cal. 552, 22 Am. St. Rep. 268, 26 Pac. 599; Richardson v. Hittle, 31 Ind. 119; Timson v.

Mfg's Coal & Coke Co., 220 Mo. 580, 119 S. W. 565; Horn v. Davis, 70 Or. 498, 142 Pac. 544.

2 Gate City Nat'l Bank v. Elliott (Mo.), 181 S. W. 25.

3 Lewis v. Doyle, 182 Mich. 141, 148 N. W. 407.

4 Lewis v. Doyle, 182 Mich. 141, 148 N. W. 407.