The horse was exempt from attachment, if required for farming or teaming purposes, or other actual use. G. L., c. 224, s. 2. This was a question of fact, which has been determined at the trial term in favor of the plaintiff. Somers v. Emerson, 58 N. H. 48 ; Parshley v. Green, 58 N. H. 271; Rice v. Wadsworth, 59 N. H. 100; Richards v. Hubbard, 59 N. H. 158; George v. Fellows, 59 N. H. 206; Cutting v. Tappan, 59 N. H. 562; Hall v. Nelson, 59 N. H. 573 ; George v. Fellows, 60 N. H. 398; Jaquith v. Scott, 63 N. H. 5. The evidence was sufficient to justify the finding.

Exception overruled.