Viewing page 237 of 260

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

the plaintiff's evidence & construe that most strongly in his favor. & unless so viewing the case, we think the verdict plainly wrong, we can not reverse the judgment. I do not think the applicator in this case can stand that rigid test. The plaintiff's witnesses testify that his horse was stolen in July 1863 in the county of Fairfax, & was seen by them in the defendant's possession in the fall of 1865. Some of them fixed the value of the horse at from $125 to $150. Upon this evidence standing alone, & believed to be true, with all fair inferences that might be drawn from it, the jury were warranted in finding a verdict for the plaintiff, & fixing the value of the horse at $75 & the damages at $75. At all events their verdict to that effect is set so plainly wrong as to justify the