The plaintiff brought suit to recover damages for the appropriation for public purposes of a part of her lot in Thomasville. The defendants denied the material allegations of the complaint, and on the trial the following verdict was returned:

*873 “1. Were tbe lands of tbe plaintiff taken and appropriated by tbe defendant, tbe city of Tbomasville, for street purposes as alleged in tbe complaint? Answer: Tes.

“2. If so, wbat damages, if any, is tbe plaintiff entitled to recover? Answer: $650.”

There was a judgment for tbe plaintiff against tbe city of Tbomas-ville and tbe city appealed assigning error.

Tbe defendants’ exceptions to tbe evidence and to tbe court’s refusal to give its prayers for instructions are untenable, and we find no reversible error in tbe instructions given.

No error.