There was evidence tending to show that the note in suit was paid by Reel & McGraw and surrendered to them, although subsequently retaken by the plaintiff from Reel & McGraw, and held by it without the knowledge or consent of the defendant Cave. If the jury believed such evidence, notwithstanding the evidence in conflict, the verdict was correct. In such case we will not disturb the verdict. There was evidence, also, tending to show that the plaintiff had sufficient property of Reel & McGraw attached to secure the *426payment of the note, and that the attachment was released without the knowledge or consent of the defendant Cave. Cave being an accommodation maker, should not, under such circumstances, be injured by the acts of plaintiff.

No error appearing, the order is affirmed.