There was no allegation or issue as to assumption of risk. There was evidence of negligence, and the testimony tended to show that the plaintiff was working under the direction and supervision of one of the defendants and a foreman, and. that he was doing the work according to instructions given him by said defendant and the foreman. Furthermore, there was evidence that positive assurance was given that there was no danger in doing the work according to the method adopted by the employer.

Hence the trial judge ruled correctly when he submitted the case to the jury. Neville v. Bonsal, 166 N. C., 218, 81 S. E., 448; Fowler v. Conduit Co., 192 N. C., 14, 133 S. E., 188.

No error.