
    Baker v. Knox & McCall.
    Submitted October 5,
    Decided October 30, 1900.
    Complaint. Before F. W. Copeland, judge pro hac vice. Walker superior court. February term, 1900.
    
      Lumpkin & Shattuck, for plaintiff in error.
   Fish, J.

The motion for a continuance, being entirely without merit, was properly overruled; the charge complained of was a correct statement of the law, and not of itself erroneous merely because the court may have failed to give to the jury another pertinent instruction; the evidence warranted the jury in finding that the defendant, though a minor at the time of executing the note sued on, was, with his father’s permission, engaging in business as an adult, that the note was given in pursuance of a contract connected with that business, and that the defendant ratified the same after attaining his majority. The motion for a new trial was properly overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Little, J., absent.  