
    1021.
    Walker v. State.
    Accusation of larceny, from city .court of Griffin — Judge Hammond. January 13, 1908.
    Argued March 11,
    Decided March 16, 1908.
    Andrew Walker was convicted on an accusation charging him with the larceny of two hens, the property of B. N. Barrow. Barrow testified, that the hens were taken from his yard, and he found in his garden, near where they were taken, one person’s tracks, which went in the direction of the road; and, where these tracks led out of the garden, he found tracks of two persons, which led towards town. He went to town and got a-policeman, who went with him to the house of Andrew Walker’s mother, about a mile and a half from where the hens were taken, and there got the hens.' Andrew Walker did not live there. He lived in town, and worked at a place about 400 or 500 yards from the house of the witness, between the house of the witness and town. Alex Harris was convicted of - stealing the samé hens. The mother of the accused testified, that the two hens, were brought to her house at night, in a sack, by Alex Harris, who wanted to sell them to her. Andrew Walker came with him. She told Alex she did not want to buy them, and he asked her to let them stay there until he came-back for them. She told him they could stay; and he did not come back. Andrew Walker did not' say anything about the hens. He and Alex remained a short time and left together. The accused made the following statement to the jury: I started home from my work place the night the chickens were stolen, and met Alex Harris. He offered to sell me some chickens. I told him I did not want to buy, that I had no money. ^ He asked me if my mother wanted some. I told him I did not know, but that he could see. I went with him to my mother’s, stopped in with him a short time, left, and went home. I had nothing to do with the chickens in any way.
    The accused excepted to the overruling of his motion for a new trial, which was on the ground, among others, that the verdict was without evidence to support it.
    
      Thomas W. Thurman, for plaintiff in error.
    
      William H. Beck, solicitor, contra.
   Powell, J.

The evidence is not sufficient to connect the defendant with the larceny. Judgment reversed.  