#### H. C. WALL and others v. HENRY FAIRLEY and others.

The presiding Judge, on a trial in the Court below, has the power in his discretion to allow or refuse amendments to the pleadings.

(Bobmson v. WiTloucfliby, 67, N, C. Rep. 84, cited and approved.)

MotioN, by plaintiff's, to amend the- pleadings, heard at Spring Term, 1873, before his Honor, Buxton, J-, of the Supe-perior Court of RichmoND county.

The amendment asked, consisted in substituting an amended complaint in lieu of the original, which the counsel represented to his Honor had been filed under a misapprehension of the facts of the ease; the true state of which had come to light since the original was filed.

The Court allowed the amendment, from which order, defendants appealed.

WMcL. McKay and MoJYeill, for appellant.

Battle c& Soy,, contra.

Reade, J.

The power of the Court below to allow the amendment, is the only question. And about that there is no doubt. The case of Robinson v. Willoughby, 67 N. C. Rep. 84, is decidedly in point in favor, of the power.

There is no error. This will be certified.

Pek Cubiam. Order affirmed.