
    The Central Railroad & Banking Co. vs. Rouse.
    
    When this ease was formerly before the Supreme Court, it was held that, under the facts then presented, the defendant was liable in damages, and the case was returned for a new trial solely because the court below erred it his charge as to the measure of damages. On the-last trial, the facts did not materially, differ from those on the former trial; the charge was not erroneous; the measure of damages was fairly and properly submitted, and the court below did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.
    March 19, 1888.
    
      Res acljudicata. Damages. Charge of court. New trial. Before Judge Fort. Macon superior court. May term, 1887.
    
      Reported in the decision.
    Lyon & Estes, for plaintiff in error.
    B. P. Hollis, E. G. Simmons and Guerry & Son, contra.
    
    
      
       Simmons, J., being disqualified, Judge Roney, of the Augusta circuit, was designated to preside in his stead.
    
   Roney, Judge.

This is the second time this case has been to this court. When here before (October term, 1886, 77 Ga. 303,) it was held, under the facts of the case then made, that the Central Railroad & Banking Company was liable in damages, and the case was sent back for a new trial solely because the court below erred in his charge to the jury on the measure of damages.

The facts upon the last trial do not materially differ-from the facts on the first trial; so treating the liability of the company as settled, it is only necessary to examine the charge of the court, which is set out in full in the record, to see if any error was committed on the subject of damages.

We find no error in the charge. The measure of damages was fairly submitted to the j ury, in strict compliance with the rule laid down by this court when the case was here before.

After inspecting the whole record and the errors complained of, we are satisfied that the court below was right in refusing a new trial, and we therefore affirm the judgment.  