Error  is  also  predicated  on  the  action  of  the  court

in  admitting  certain  evidence  of  appellee  Deardurff

over  the  objection  of  appellant.  The  record  dis-

4.  closes  that  such  appellee  testified  that  the
name,  A.  H.  Deardruff,  written  on  appel-
lant's exhibit  **B*'  was  not  his  signature.  He
also  testified  in  substance  that  said  Marquiss  had
presented  him  a  paper  about  six  inches  square
to  sign;  that  such  paper  was  typewritten  without
any  other  printing  on  it;  that  he  signed  the  same
Avith  a  fountain  pen  in  another  room  out  of  the
presence  of  said  Marquiss,  and  that  he  never
signed  any  paper  for  him  with  a  lead  pencil;
that  at  the  time  he  signed  such  paper' nothing  was
said  about  any  guaranty,  or  that  he  was  to  be  liable
for  any  sum  of  money.  In  this  connection  the  vnt-
ness  was  then  asked  what  Marquiss  had  said  that  he
had,  and  wanted  him  to  do.  Appellant 's  objection  to
this  question  was  overruled,  and  the  witness  answered
as  follows :  *  *  He  said  he  wanted  me  to  sign  a  recom-
mend. He  said  he  was  moving  from  Rose  Lawn  to
Brook  and  he  had  to  get  his  medicine  there,  and  he
had  to  be  identified  and  he  wanted  a  recommend.*'
Appellant  contends  that  the  overruling  of  its  objec-
tion to  the  question  last  stated  was  reversible  error.
