The information was substantially the same in this case that it was in case No. 10,757, supra, against the same defendant, and what we said about the information in that case is applicable to this.

The evidence was sufficient to justify the verdict, and we will not disturb it.

The Court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial, on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The case does not show the requisite amount of diligence. Judgment and order affirmed.