¶1 We have carefully examined the record and are of opinion there were circumstances in evidence fit to be considered by the jury on the issues of undue influence.
¶2*477 Tbe evidence of the petitioners tended to prove that Martha Barnes was old and feeble; that before the execution of the deeds she had two strokes of paralysis, and that her mind was much impaired; that she had eleven children, and that the deeds purported to pass seven-tenths of her property to a son-in-law and one child, and that there was no reason for discriminating between the children; that the deeds and lease were without consideration; that the first deed was to the son-in-law, and she was then living with him; that before the execution of this deed the son-in-law had two doctors to examine her for the purpose of seeing if she had sufficient mind to make a deed; that he employed an attorney to prepare the deed, and paid his fee; that he went to .Elm City to get witnesses for the execution of the deed., because, as he said, “he wanted a good element”; that he had four witnesses to the deed “to show that she was in good fix”; that he said .nothing to any one about the execution of the deed prior to its execution, and that he then told John R. Barnes, a son, and soon thereafter the other deed was executed under similar circumstances.
¶3 These circumstances, considered separately, would not be sufficient to justify setting aside the deeds, but when considered together ought to have been submitted to the jury.
¶4 No error.