WALKER, Chief Justice.
This is a compensation case, filed in the district court of Jefferson County by appellee, I. C. Page, defendant in error, against appellant, The Southern Under-writers, plaintiff in error, as an appeal from an adverse award of the Industrial Accident Board. Appellant was the compensation insurance carrier; appellee, the employee; and Southern Lumber Company, the employer. The trial was to a jury, and by its verdict it found the following controlling facts: On or about the 29th of March, 1936, while "engaged in the usual course of the trade, business, profession or occupation of his employer", that is, while he was engaged in "tightening bolts on a hinge on the door of a dry kiln", appellee sustained a personal injury. The injury—"a break in bone of his left foot and injury to the ligaments, tendons and nerves in his right foot and leg"—"was caused by his falling on a ladder upon which he was standing". The injury "was an accident", and has caused appellee to "suffer pains which extended from the leg and up into the spinal portion" of his body, and "was sustained in the course of his employment with the Southern Lumber Company". It was further found that, as a proximate result of the personal injury suffered by appellee on the 29th day of March, 1936, while in the course of his employment with Southern Lumber Company, he suffered permanent, total disability, and that an injustice would result to him if he were denied "a lump sum settlement". On the verdict of the jury, judgment was entered in appellee's favor for the sum of $5,727.41, with interest at six per cent per annum from the 12th day of June, 1937, the date of the judgment, and all costs of suit. From the judgment appellant has duly prosecuted its appeal to this court, and thus states the issue of the appeal:
"The only question involved in this appeal is whether or not the plaintiff, I. C. Page, at the time of his injury was engaged in the usual occupation of his employer, Southern Lumber Company."
In explanation of the point at issue we make the following statement from the record:
"B. M. Jackson, vice president of the Southern Lumber Company, testified in part as follows:
"We (Southern Lumber Company) are engaged in manufacturing and wholesaling lumber. On March 29, 1936, we were engaged in the building of a dry kiln at the plant. The purpose of building this dry kiln was to increase our capacity. I have been in the saw mill business indirectly for ten years, but directly for about six or seven. I am acquainted with sawmills over this part of Texas, Southeast Texas, and the equipment of them. All of the larger mills have dry kilns, but many of the smaller mills don't have them. I wouldn't say all mills have dry kilns, but nearly all.
"Q. A dry kiln in a company as large as yours is just a part of the equipment of the mill? A. I know of others that didn't have them; nearly always they build them as soon as they get the money to do it.
"Q. They install better machinery when they get the money? A. Certainly.
"Q. It makes a better mill; I don't mean that you can't run a mill without it. A. That's the idea I was trying to convey.
"Q. All the mills that are able to have those dry kilns, and the purpose is what? A. To dry the upper grade lumber.
"Q. And that is solely to facilitate getting the lumber on to the market, isn't it? A. Well, that's partly it, and then partly because it dries a great deal faster that way, and doesn't require so much investment in lumber.
"Q. Your turn over is faster? A. That's right.
"Q. You get it out of the mill, get it into the kiln, dry it and sell it? A. That's right.
"Q. Whereas, if you have to stand it in the sun, maybe one day, and rain the next, you can't tell when it is going to dry? A. Yes, sir.
"Q. You can't get it to the lumber yard until it is dry? Can you? A. No, sir.
"Q. I want to know whether or not the building of those dry kilns, erecting of them and maintenance, keeping them up, is a part
of the business of manufacturing and retailing lumber?
"Mr. Battaile: I object to it, Your Honor, on the ground that it is a double question.
"Q. All right, I'll break it up. I don't want to confuse you and I don't want to become confused. I say, in the manufacture of lumber and timber products, as it is carried on by the Southern Lumber Company at its mill here in Beaumont, isn't the maintenance of a dry kiln an essential part of the operation of the business of the Southern Lumber Company here in the manufacture of lumber and timber products? A. As we carry it on, it is.
"Q. And as you were carrying it on in November, 1936; you had a dry kiln in operation out there? A. In November, 1936, yes sir.
"Q. And this was also true of March 29, 1936? A. Yes.
"Q. And did you also have a dry kiln in operation out there at your plant in November, 1935? (Effective dates of policy, beginning November 28, 1935, expiring November 28, 1936) A. Yes, sir.
"Q. Now, I'll ask you, as you conducted the business of the Southern Lumber Company here at the mill at Beaumont, manufacturing lumber and timber products, was it a part of that business to build that dry kiln? A. I would still like to qualify.
"Q. All right. A. Well, I mean it is no more a part than any other building you would have, the saw mill or anything else; you wouldn't have to build it; we had kilns already in operation.
"Q. But good business dictated you to building it out there? A. We expected to profit by it.
"Q. Just as good business directed you to install a new boiler, or a new saw, or different equipment in the mill? A. That's a little bit different, because we change that kind of stuff constantly.
"Q. You only build a dry kiln when you want to expand your business. A. Those we had stayed there about fifteen or sixteen years.
"Q. Have you got machinery some of it that lasts that long, too? A. Yes.
"Q. Machinery in the mill that is used for making wood? A. Some of it last that long."
Plaintiff's witness, W. H. Thornton, testified in part as follows:
"Q. Do you know whether or not a dry kiln is a part of the general system of a saw mill? A. Yes, sir.
"Q. Do you know whether or not a dry kiln is necessary for sawmill work? A. Yes, sir.
"Q. You say a dry kiln is necessary to a sawmill? A. Yes, sir; to the up-to-date sawmill.
"Q. Oh, it is to the up-to-date saw mill now? A. The way they run lumber through them, I think it would be a necessity."
Plaintiff, I. C. Page, testified as follows:
"On or about the 29th day of March, 1936, I was working for the Southern Lumber Company in Jefferson County, in the City of Beaumont, at which time I sustained an injury. I was working for the company on a dry kiln inside of the building and I was up on top of a ladder. The ladder wasn't built as well as it could have been. I was standing on top of the ladder might near straight up with a nigger supposed to be holding this ladder while I put a nut on a bolt up there with an open end wrench. I had been working at this dry kiln for ten days. Every sawmill that I was ever around had a dry kiln. I was employed by the Southern Lumber Company to work on this dry kiln and this is all the work that I have ever done for them. I am a contractor by trade. They had about ten or twelve carpenters working on this dry kiln. The brick work was in place at the...
