PER CURIAM.
The four questions posed for adjudication on this appeal have each been carefully considered. We have read the evidence and examined the instructions or charges as were given the jury by the trial Court. The requested charges on the part of counsel for defendant-appellant which were not given have been considered in light of all other charges as given by the trial Court. It is our view that the several disputes and conflicts in the evidence were for the jury and we are without authority to pit our judgment against that of the jury duly sworn to try the issues of fact.
The several affidavits submitted by the parties as to the alleged improper conduct of the jury which were presented to and duly considered by the trial Court prior to the entry of the order denying the motion for a new trial have been reviewed in light of the contentions of counsel for defendant-appellant. The cause comes to this Court with a presumption of correctness of the rulings of the lower Court and we are not convinced that the appellant has carried the burden of showing reversible error as required by our adjudications.
The judgment of the lower Court is affirmed.
TERRELL, Acting Chief Justice, and CHAPMAN and ROBERTS, JJ., and DICKINSON, Associate Justice, concur.