This is another one of those cases which rests upon the question whether the judge who presided at the trial abused that discretion with which he is by law invested, in granting or refusing motions for new trial, founded upon the ground that the verdict is against the evidence, etc. In such cases, where no argument could illustrate any principle of law, and the court below has not abused his discretion, it is sufficient to say that the judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.