
    Hill v. Duke et al.
    
    February 26, 1913.
    Equitable petition. Before Judge Brand. ■ Jackson superior court. October 5, 1911.
    
      J. A. B. Mahaffey, Cobb & Erwin, and John J. Striclclmd, for plaintiff in error.
    
      H. E. Dem, J. S. Ayers, and Thomas J. Shackelford, contra.
   Atkinson, J.

1. The charge was substantially correct, and adjusted to the evidence. In-so far as proper, the requests to charge were covered by the general charge.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict) and there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.  