
    Joseph H. Newins et al., App'lts, v. H. Eckford Rose, Resp’t.
    Sup. Ct., 2 D.,
    May 13, 1895.
    
      George F. Stackpole, for app’ts; Arington H. Carman, for resp’t.
   Cullen, J.

I vote to affirm, without opinion. The testimony of Seaman that he did not sell the goods to defendant was erroneously admitted against •defendant’s objection and exceptions, and was a mere statement of conclusion. He did not state wliat the transaction was, nor deny defendant’s statement, that nothing was said between them reserving the goods plaintiffs had sold Seaman.  