The evidence would have authorized a conviction of assault with intent to murder. It abundantly justified the verdict of shooting at another. The instructions complained of were free from substantial error. Taken as a whole, the charge was more favorable to the accused than he had a right to demand. No reason appears for reversing the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

dissenting. Without regard to the real truth of the transaction (which the testimony of the witnesses seems to confuse rather than to clarify), I am of the opinion that the charge complained of was not adjusted to the defenses presented by the accused upon his trial, and practically eliminated his statement to the jury.