1. In a suit on account brought by an insurance agent against his customer the allegation that the customer is indebted to the insurance agent in a certain bum for an insurance policy issued by a named insurance company is equivalent to an averment that the policy was furnished to the customer by the plaintiff insurance agent, and does not imply that the customer owes the sum claimed to the insurance company.

3. The defendant's general demurrer raising the questions disposed of in the foregoing headnotes was properly overruled by the trial judge.

4. The verdict was for the exact amount and not in excess of that for which recovery was sought.

5. The judge of the superior court did not err in affirming the judgment of the trial court from which the case was certioraried.