Pee Cueiam,

We think the court below erred in refusing to admit the evidence offered by the plaintiff in error, as set forth in the first bill of exceptions. Although we think the facts if proved, would not have been a defence to the action, still they should have been permitted to be shown in mitigation of damages.

The evidence proffered as stated in the second bill of exceptions, was correctly refused admission.

Judgment set aside and trial de novo ordered.