
    Rounsaville & Brother v. Watters.
    The requests to charge, so far as they were applicable, were covered by the charge given, which fairly presented for determination by the jury the vital issue involved in the case, it affirmatively appearing that as to the debt upon which the plaintiffs’ judgment was founded, the credit was not extended upon the faith of the property in controversy; and the evidence being otherwise sufficient to warrant the j ury in finding for the claimant, there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to grant a new trial.
    July 30, 1894.
    
      Judgment affirmed.
    
    Levy and claim. Before Judge Henry. Floyd superior court. September term, 1893.
    Nat Harris and C. A. Thornwell, for plaintiffs.
   In this case the plaintiffs contended that the defendant in fi. fa. paid certain amounts on the purchase money of' the lots levied on; that he fraudulently transferred his stock of goods and his interest in said lots, but continued to manage the goods, and from sales thereof used certain amounts in improving the lots. The jury found the property not subject, and plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial was overruled.  