¶1 There was ample evidence to be submitted to the jury. The defendant’s contention, made first at the trial, that he had lost the watch and that his wife had pawned the ring without his knowledge or consent were matters in defense rejected by the jury.
¶2 The warrant as amended is fully sufficient to charge the violation of C. S., sec. 4287, and defendant’s demurrer thereto cannot be sustained. Likewise, the court fully and correctly charged the law applicable to the evidence and the contentions based thereon. The defendant’s exceptions thereto cannot be sustained.
¶3 In the trial below we find
¶4 No error.