Action foe Death—Negligence—Proximate Cause of Injury — Absence of Proof.—In an action for death, assuming the negligence of the defendant to have been proved, it must be made to appear that such negligence was the proximate cause of the injury which resulted in the death; and in the absence of proof fastening the negligence to the injury, a case is not made out, and the case stands as if no negligence had been proved.

Id.—Backing of Engine — Absence of Light upon Rear—Causal Connection not Shown—Presumption or Guess not Permissible. — Conceding that the death was caused by the backing of an engine, upon a dark and foggy morning, without any light upon the rear of the engine, in the absence of any proof tending to show any causal connection between the death and the absence of the light, none can he presumed, or conjectured, or guessed at by the jury, and a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff cannot be sustained. The deceased may have accidentally fallen upon the track, or may have been killed without fault upon his part, and under such circumstances that the absence of the light in no way tended to his death ; and it cannot he inferred as a fact that the want of the light was the proximate cause of his death.

Id.—Killing of Another Man—Failure of Proof.—The fact that another man was killed at the same time, in the absence of proof that he was then in the possession of his faculties, cannot raise a presumption that the absence of the light upon the tender was the proximate cause of death.

Id. — Code Rule—Support of Verdict—Slight Evidence Insufficient.— Under section 3835 of the Code of Civil Procedure, only such evidence as “ ordinarily produces moral certainty or conviction in an unprejudiced mind,” is “ deemed satisfactory,” or “ will justify a verdict.” “ Slight evidence” is insufficient; and where there is not even slight evidence to support the verdict, it must be set aside.