It was, under the evidence in this case, exceedingly doubtful whether the plaintiff’s injuries resulted from the defective condition of the defendant’s locomotive, as alleged in his petition; but even upon the assumption that a defect existed which caused the injuries complained of, the judgment of nonsuit was right, for the plaintiff’s own testimony demanded a finding that he was fully aware of the existence of the defect and voluntarily and deliberately assumed the risk of being hurt in consequence thereof.

Judgment affirmed.