
    Martin v. Kendrick et al.
    
    The evidence warranted the verdict. The newly discovered evidence, if true, would only tend to discredit the plaintiff’s witnesses, and would throw no direct light of its own upon the controversy. The court did not err in denying a new trial. Judgment affirmed.
    
    August 6, 1894.
    Trover. Before Judge Harris. Carroll superior court. - April term, 1898.
    C. W. Austin, for plaintiff in error. Oscar Reese, W. F. Brown, W. C. Adamson and C. P. Cordon, contra.
   The suit was for the value of certain cross-ties, and plaintiffs had a verdict. The case turned on questions of fact and credibility of witnesses, the evidence being conflicting.  