
    W. B. HAWES v. BLADEN LUMBER COMPANY.
    (Filed 11 October, 1916.)
    Civil actioN tided at January Term, 1916, of DupliN, before Allen, J., upon these issues:
    1. Did defendant wrongfully and unlawfully cut and remove timber from tbe lands of plaintiff, as alleged in tbe complaint? Answer: “Yes.”
    2. "What damage, if any, is plaintiff entitled to recover of tbe defendant? Answer: “$330.”
    From tbe judgment rendered, defendant appealed.
    
      Stevens & Beasley for plaintiff.
    
    
      R. K. Bryan, H. D. Williams for defendant.
    
   BitowN, J.

This appeal involves tbe same questions that are discussed and decided in the case of L. H. Bradshaw v. Hilton Lumber Co., at this term, ante, 219, except tbe point at which tbe diameter is to be taken is fixed in tbe deed. In addition to tbe matters of law presented in that case, tbe defendant requested tbe court to charge tbe jury that there is no evidence in this case which would justify tbe jury in finding that the defendant wrongfully and unlawfully cut any timber or trees of tbe plaintiff, and that tbe jury should answer tbe first issue “No.”

Upon an examination of tbe evidence, we find that there is evidence sufficient to go to tbe jury and that bis Honor properly refused to give such instructions. We think it is needless to discuss tbe evidence or point it out in this opinion.

No error.  