Mobile O. R. Co. v. Williams

*406FOSTER, J.

This is the third appeal in this case. On the first, error was confessed. The second is reported in 219 Ala. 238, 121 So. 722. The facts shown in the report of the last appeal are in substance shown on this and additional evidence referred to in this opinion.

On this appeal, as on that, appellant’s counsel press their contention that the proof does not justify an inference of negligence proximately causing the death of intestate, but only a conjecture to that effect. Of course if a conjecture is the only proper result of the. evidence, it is not sufficient to justify an inference of…