On Motion for Rehearing.
In our original opinion, in discussing the question of whether the deed from T. T. Hailey to T. J. Hailey conveyed the land in controversy in this suit, we say:
“We find no evidence in the record showing that the land described in the deed included the whole or any part of the land in controversy in this suit.”
In the motion for rehearing appellee has called our attention to a number of circumstances shown by the evidence which, taken together, are sufficient to justify a finding that the land in controversy was conveyed by the deed mentioned, and we must retract our former statement. We adhere, however, to the conclusion expressed in our original opinion that the findings of the trial court must be interpreted as including a fact finding that the land in controversy was not conveyed by the deed mentioned, and such finding is binding upon us on this appeal.
We think the motion for rehearing should be overruled; and it is so ordered.