The defendant appeals from a judgment for the plaintiff in a suit for personal injuries suffered while the plaintiff was a passenger on the defendant’s train in Virginia. The court charged the jury that “As a common carrier the defendant railroad company was required by law to use the highest degree of care for the safe carrying of plaintiff as a passenger. This highest degree of care which the law places upon a common carrier does not make the common carrier an insurer of the passengers’ *757 safety but it does require that the common carrier shall exercise extraordinary vigilance for the purpose of protecting its passengers against injury * * * We disagree with the defendant’s contention that this imposed a higher standard of care than the Virginia rule, which is that “a common carrier must exercise the highest degree of practical care for the safety of its passengers * * *” Crist v. Washington, Virginia & Maryland Coach Co., 196 Va. 642, 645, 85 S.E.2d 213, 215. We have considered the defendant’s other contentions and find jno error affecting substantial rights.

Affirmed.