Trial court erred in rendering directed verdict in favor of holder of note where lay witness testimony showed poor hygiene, delusions, poor sleep, forgetfulness, and inability to recognize others. Their testimony should have been admissible even though remote in time as to execution of note because "evidence of unsoundness can not be restricted to time limitations."

In order to render the act done void because of the mental unsoundness, the incapacity must exist at the time the act is done, but the evidence of the incapacity is not limited to the time the act is done, but testimony is admissible as of the time and before and after.