
    Ronsheim & Brothers v. Brimberry.
    The charge o£ the court was warranted by the evidence, and in the absence of a request to charge more specifically, was full enough to cover the substantial issues in the case; and the verdict was not contrary to law orto evidence.
    March 26, 1892.
    Argued at the last term.
    Charge of court. Verdict. Before Judge Bower. Mitchell superior court. November term, T890.
    This was a suit on an account for clothing sold. It was defended on the ground that the sale was made on agreement that the defendant might return such of the goods as did not, in quality and style, equal the samples exhibited to him by the plaintiffs’ agent, and the clothing was to be shipped in one lot and without delay; but that it was shipped in two lots at different times and after considerable delay, parts of suits in the first lot being withheld until the second shipment; that the greater portion of the clothing was inferior in style and quality to the samples ; and that the defendant paid the plaintifis for such of the goods as he retained, and shipped the rest back to them in a reasonable time. The evidence was conflicting. The jury found for the defendant. The plaintifis moved for a new trial on the general grounds, and because of numerous alleged errors in the judge’s charge, especially in that it excluded from the consideration of the jury the questions mainly relied on by the plaintifis, and in that it was not justified by the evidence in the submission of certain issues. The motion was ovei’ruled.
   Judgment affirmed.

’ Spence & Twitty, by brief, for plaintifis.

I. A. Bush, by brief, for defendant.  