Beaufort Truck Growers' Ass'n v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.

Mr. J ustice Brease: I concur in .the opinion of Mr. Justice Watts that there should be an affirmation in this cause. Some of the testimony of the witness Butler, to which Mr. Justice Cothran has called attention, may not have been strictly admissible under the rule as laid down in the case between the parties to this action, reported in 121 S. E., 554; 128 S. C., 1, which case cited as authorities Gwathmey v. Foor Hotel Co., 113 S. E., 688; 121 S. C., 237, and Copeland Co. v. Davis, 119 S. E., 19; 125 S. C., 449, although I am inclined to think that the testimony was competent. But even if…