
    Submitted on briefs without argument,
    decided July 26, 1910.
    HOWELL v. WHEELER.
    [109 Pac. 865.]
    Appeal and Error — Record—Evidence.
    The sufficiency of the evidence to justify the decree will not be considered, where the testimony is not in the record.
    From Coos: James W. Hamilton, Judge.
    This is a suit by William Howell against Edgar L. Wheeler, and Luella Wheeler, his wife, Prosper Mill Company, a corporation, William Hicking, W. S. McFarland, and Cora B. McFarland, his wife, W. B. Mavity, Annia A. Mundy, Clarence Y. Lowe, Sarah A. Fahy, Francis J. Fahy, G. B. Cox, sometimes known as Glenn Cox, and Bank of Bandon, a corporation, to reform a certain deed set forth in the complaint, so that the same would show that the timber on the lands described in said deed were excepted and reserved therefrom, and that the plaintiff, William Howell, had one year from the date of said deed in which to remove said timber. From a decree in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal.
    Affirmed.
    For appellants there was a brief over the name of Mr. Austin S. Hammond.
    
    For respondent there was a brief over the name of Mr. Joseph W. Bennett.
    
   Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court adjudging that plaintiff is the owner of the standing timber on 160 acres of land, situated in Coos County, Oregon.

The only question raised by the assignments of error is as to whether the evidence is sufficient to justify the decree. The testimony in the case is not in the record before us, and we have no alternative but to affirm the decree.

The decree is affirmed. Affirmed.  