Lumpkin, P. J.
1. The evidence was amply sufficient, both as to venue and. as to the guilt of the accused.
2. It does not, after a careful examination of all the evidence, pro and con, relating to the ground of the motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, appear that the court erred in adjudging that this ground was without merit. Judgment affirmed.
AU the Justices concurring.