
    Elizabeth H. Ozmint, plaintiff in error, vs. William P. Daniel, defendant in error.
    Where a certiorwi involves no legal principle, hut merely draws in question the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict- rendered by a jury in the trial of a case of forcible detainer, the judgment of the superior court holding the- evidence sufficient, and therefore dismissing,the eerUora/H, will not be disturbed unless palpably erroneous.
    
      CertiorcM'i. New Trial. Before Judge Rice. Jackson Superior Court. August Term, 1816.
    Report unnecessary..
    S. P. Thurmond ; Pope Barrow, for- plaintiff in error.
    Emory Speer, for defendant.
   Bleckley,, Judge.

So long as any power is left to the circuit judge to decide on the sufficiency of evidence, there can be no reversal where he has decided' so correctly as he has in the present case. We agree with him precisely.

Judgment affirmed.  