The court was correct in his ruling that the plaintiff was entitled to compensation if his injury resulted from the effect of a compensable accident upon a pre-existing physical abnormality. Guay v. Company, 83 N.H. 392; Thomson v. Company, 86 N.H. 436, 437. However, not having the benefit of the written record, the court seems to have misunderstood the defendants contention. Apparently the court understood that the defendant conceded that the plaintiffs injury was due in part to the accident and in part to the alleged deformity. Such was not in fact the case. The defendant contended that the accident was not in any way the cause of the injury, but only the occasion for the discovery of the plaintiffs deformity, and that the operation which caused the disability was performed solely to correct the deformity. Since this misunderstanding denied the defendant an opportunity to have its contention passed upon there must be a new trial.