1. Under the facts of the case the court did not err: (a) in disallowing the proffered amendment to the defendant’s original plea in abatement; (6) in disallowing the defendant’s special plea in bar; (c) in dismissing the motion for a new trial.
2. This court not being satisfied that the writ of error was prosecuted for the purpose of delay only, the request of the defendant in error for the award.of damages is denied.
Judgment affirmed.
Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.