
    Dorothy Maedl, Respondent, v. International Railway Company, Appellant, and Martin Baldis, Defendant.
   Judgment and orders affirmed, with costs. All concur, except Crosby, P. J., and Taylor, J., who dissent and vote for reversal on the facts and for granting a new trial on the ground that the verdict as to appellant’s negligence is against the weight of the evidence. (The judgment is for plaintiff in a railway negligence action. The orders deny motions for a new trial.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.  