It is the theory of the State that the defendant appropriated to his own use the difference between $3,224.80 and $2,000, and that, when called upon to explain the transaction in the accounting, he swore falsely relative to the sale of the note and mortgage. In the suit for accounting the trial court found that the defendant was indebted to the estate in the sum of $1,224.80, and on appeal ( Wickwire v. King, 161 Or. 369, 88 P.2d 803) the decree was affirmed. We are unable to say there is no substantial evidence tending to support the verdict of the jury finding the defendant guilty as charged.