Tbe court below erred in rendering judgment for plaintiff and ignoring tbe issue as to contributory negligence. Contributory negligence is pleaded in tbe answer, and there is abundant evidence to justify its submission to tbe jury. His Honor should have sent tbe jury back with directions to respond to that issue before receiving tbe verdict. If tbe issue is answered favorably to tbe defendant, it bars recovery in this case.

Tbe court also erred in ruling out evidence tending to prove that tbe plaintiff was drinking, and in a drunken condition at tbe time of tbe alleged collision with tbe defendant’s engine; and that such condition caused tbe injury.

Tbe judgment of tbe court is reversed, and a new trial is ordered on tbe second issue.

For these reasons there must be a

New trial.