Negligence—Master and Servant—'Sake Place to Work.—The duty of an employer to furnish his employee with a reasonably safe place to work is limited to the ¡premises where the employee is required to be, for the purposes of his employment.

ID.—Starting of Machinery—Employee Working in Wrong Place.— If an employee, while working in a place where he was not required to be, was injured by the starting of the machinery, such starting would not constitute negligence in the absence of proof that the employer knew or had reason to know that he was in a position of danger.

Id.—Preparation of Place and Appliances by Employee.—The rule requiring the master to provide a safe place for the servant does not apply when the place at which the work is to be done, or the appliances for doing the same, are to be prepared by the servant himself.

Id,—Employee in Lumber-mill—Negligence not Established.—In this action to recover for the death of an employee in a lumber-mill, occasioned by his body being drawn against and crushed by a rapidly revolving shaft, the evidence is held insufficient to establish negligence on the part of the employer either in failing to furnish a safe place in which to work, or in starting the machinery after the employee had begun to work thereon.

Id.—Bes Ipsa Loquitur—Doctrine Inapplicable.—Where there was no evidence that the machinery was started after the employee had begun to work thereon, and the undisputed testimony showed that it had not been started 'at all, and therefore could not have been started negligently, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is inapplicable. Evidence—Impeaching Testimony—Inconsistent Statements.—When a witness is impeached by proof of prior inconsistent statements, •the effect is merely to discredit him as a witness. The former statements made by him are incompetent for any other purpose, and do not constitute evidence of the truth of the facts so stated by him.