It will be noted that article 945 provides that the facts stated, as distinguished from the conclusions stated, must show that injustice was done the applicant. As was said by Chief Justice Huff in Railway v. Boyce (Tex.Civ.App.) 206 S.W. 112, 113: "The mere general statement that appellant had a good defense or that injustice has been done is not sufficient, but the petition must state facts upon which it is expected to recover should the writ be granted.

The writ is not granted as a matter of right. Wilson v. Griffin, 1 White W. Civ.Cas.Ct.App. § 1313, but the application is addressed to the discretionary powers of the court. McBurnett v. Lampkin, 45 Tex. Civ. App. 567, 101 S.W. 864; Railway Co. v. Boyce (Tex.Civ.App.) 206 S.W. 112. The writ is available only to review a final judgment.

The petition was insufficient, and the court did not err in refusing to reinstate the case on the docket. Railway Co. v. Boyce (Tex.Civ.App.) 206 S.W. 112. The judgment should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.