Members of the jury: There is evidence to show in this case that the plaintiff, Barbara Scott, prior to March 22, 1958, had several accidents resulting in injuries to and about her body, and that she was afflicted with a chronic illness to certain of her female organs. If you find that such pre-existing condition was latent or dormant before the accident on March 22, 1958, but was brought into activity as a direct result of injuries received by her at the time of this collision, thereby resulting in pain and suffering which were not due to natural progress of such disease or condition, then you should include damages for such pain, suffering and disability, but only to the extent that the same was solely produced by the collision as a natural result thereof. In considering the question of damages or compensation to be assessed by you in answer to these questions, you are instructed that the duty devolves upon the person claiming damages to convince your minds by the greater weight of the credible evidence and to a reasonable certainty that he or she has sustained damages in the respects inquired about. You can only allow such damages as have been proved to you to a reasonable certainty. You cannot allow speculative damages based upon mere guess or conjecture. In making your assessment of damages, you will in each instance be fair and just and nothing should be added by way of punishment or because of sympathy or resentment, nor should anything be deducted by reason of doubt of the other parties' liability. You are required to answer the damage questions regardless of how the other questions are answered in the verdict. The burden of proof on questions No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, No. 5, No. 6 and No. 16 is on the plaintiff. The burden of proof on questions No. 7, No. 8, No. 9 No. 10, No. 11, No. 12, No. 13 and No. 14 is on the defendant. By burden of proof is meant the duty resting upon the party having the affirmative of an issue to satisfy or convince the minds of ten or more of you jurors by a preponderance of the questionable evidence of the truth of his or her contentions, and by a preponderance of the evidence is meant the evidence which possesses the greater weight or convincing power. I charge you further, members of the jury, that the convincing power of the evidence is not necessarily determined by the number of witnesses. It may be that the testimony given by one witness has greater convincing power than that given by certain witnesses contradicting or tending to contradict that given by one, although when all the circumstances are equal, the greater number of witnesses would carry the greater convincing power. Now, members of the jury. You are the sole and responsible judges of the weight and credit to be given to the testimony of each and every witness whose testimony has been received on this trial. In considering the credibility of any of the witnesses, you have a right to consider his or her interest in the result of this trial. The temptation that may exist under the circumstances to testify falsely, and everything appearing in the case bearing upon his or her credibility, and you are to give to such testimony such weight as you think it is entitled to, no more and no less.