Opinion.

Both of the defenses made by the appellee, to wit, that the land in controversy was redeemed within the time specified by the statute, and adverse possession of the land' for ten years prior to the commencement of the suit, are supported by the testimony.

The objections made by the appellant to certain testimony in the court below, were general, and specific objections to the same cannot be availed of here. There is no error in the instructions and the judgment is affirmed.