dissenting. I think that the charge complained of was erroneous for the reason assigned and held to be erroneous in the case of Atlantic Coast Line Ry. Co. v. Brand, 79 Ga. App. 552, and I do not think that the error was removed *249by the further charge of the court because the court in the additional charge omitted any reference to looking and listening. 'The effect of the charge was to confuse and mislead the jury •as to whether the failure of the plaintiff to look and listen could be relied on by the defendant to defeat recovery or reduce ■damages. MacIntyre, P. J., concurs in the dissent.