The   defect  in   the  gate  complained  of,  was  an  alleged

defective  fastening.     The  one  used  was  called  a  "  standard

fastening,"   and  consisted   of  a  chain  from   nine  to   twelve

inches  in  length  fastened  to  the  gate  by  a  staple,  and  a  hook

driven  into  the  gate  post     The  gate  was  fastened  by  slipping

a  link  of  the  chain  over  the  hook.     This  hook  was  constructed

with  a  stem  about  four  inches  in  length,  that  was  driven  into

the  post  by  means  of  a  shoulder  under  the  curved  part.     This

carved  part,  or  hook,  was  intended  to  stand  up  two,  or  two

and  one-lialf  inches  perpendicular  to  the  stem,  when  driven

into  the  post     It  was   insisted  by  appellee  that  this   hook

pointed  or  leaned  to  the  gate,  instead  of  being  perpendicular,

BO  that  any  pressure  on  the  gate  would  push  the  chain  over

the  hook,  and  the  gate  would  swing  open.     Appellants  insist

that   the   evidence   was  not  such  as  to  justify  the  jury  in

believing  that  this  defect  existed  in  the  hook  at  the  time  the

horses  passed  through  the  gate,  and  even  if  it  was,  it  had  not

so  existed  for  a  sufficient  length  of  time  to  hold  the  company

responsible  for  the  consequences  that  resulted.     This  was  the

principal  controverted  question  of  fact  upon  the  trial,  and

after  examining  the  testimony  with  care,  we  are  not  prepared

to  say  that  the  jury  were  not  authorized  to  find  as  they  did

upon  it.     The  most  that  can  be  said  is  that  the  evidence  upon

this  point  is  Ci>nflicting,  and  in  such  cases  the  verdict  should

not  for  that  reason  alone  be  disturbed.
