
    Mayer & Glauber vs. Tufts.
    Although the weight of the evidence may appear to have been against the plaintiff on the subject of notice, and although the value placed on the property in controversy by some of the plaintiff’s witnesses may have been too high, yet, there being gome evidence to support the verdict, and the presiding judge having required a portion of tlie verdict to be written off, and refused a new trial, this court will not interfere with his discretion in so doing.
    Judgment affirmed.
    October 27,1885.
   Hall, Justice.

.[Tufts brought trover against Mayer & Glauber to recover a fount and apparatus for making soda-water. It appeared that Tufts had sold the property to W. H. Morgan & Co., taking a note therefor, by which title was reserved until payment was made. The defendants held by purchase from Morgan & Co. The notes of Tufts were not recorded, and the evidence was conflcting as to whether the defendants had notice of the claim when they bought 'or not. There were various estimates on the value of the property, one being as high as $408. The jury found for the plaintiff $340. The defendant moved for a new trial, which the judge refused, on condition that the plaintiff would write off $112 from the verdict, which was done. The defendants excepted.]  