would not be disturbed.-Mayo v. Little Rock | § 19. & M. R. Co. (La.) 220.

*Where testimony was conflicting, the opinion of the district judge is entitled to great weight on appeal.-Antrim Lumber Co. v. S. H. Bolinger & Co. (La.) 337.

*Where a case hinges on credibility of witnesses, the judgment will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous.-Williams v. Louisiana Ry. & Navigation Co. (La.) 528.

*Where a case involves exclusively a review of the evidence, great weight is attached to the verdict.-Nixon v. New Orleans Ry. & Light Co. (La.) 568.

*Where the evidence was conflicting but the trial judge thought that the preponderance was with the plaintiff, the judgment will not be disturbed.-Gueble v. Town of Lafayette (La.) 917. 17. - Harmless error in general.

*In a civil case, the permission of a peremptory challenge, though unauthorized, is not cause for reversal if the case was tried by an impartial jury-Gayle v. Court of County Com'rs (Ala.) 261.

*The Supreme Court will not consider a phase of a decree appealed from not prejudicial to appellant.-King Lumber Co. v. Crow (Ala.) 646. Where defendant is in default for failure to answer an amended bill under rule 59, an order appointing a master to take testimony is not harmful to him.-Tampa & J. Ry. Co. v. Harrison (Fla.) 592; Same v. Anderson (Fla.) 594.

Where, on motion for new trial filed by the plaintiffs, it was for the first time suggested that some of them were minors and unrepresented, and the court ordered the case reopened for further evidence on the question of minority, plaintiffs of full age who made no objections

and tendered no additional evidence were not prejudiced.-Gilbert v. Mazerat (La.) 47.

Harmless error in rulings on evidence.

*The admission in evidence of a check and note to corroborate plaintiff's statements in an action to recover wages is harmless error where the point was already established.-Neff v. Williamson (Ala.) 238.

Where the testimony offered and excluded, together with the testimony admitted, would not establish a cause of action the question whether the court erred in excluding the testimony was immaterial.-Roberts v. English Mfg. Co. (Ala.) 752.

*Where defendant admits sending a libelous letter, the admission in evidence of a copy of a letter purporting, but not shown, to be from the person to whom the libelous letter was sent. containing matters relating to the privilege of the letter complained of, and containing ex parte suggestions relating to defendant, is harmful error.-Briggs v. Brown (Fla.) 325.

*Error on a trial for slander in the admission of a deposition held not cured by subsequently excluding it.-Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v. Rivers (Miss.) 705.

Error waived in appellate

court.

§ 20.
Objections not argued before the appellate
court will be considered as abandoned.-Hyer v.
Griffin (Fla.) 635.

$21. Subsequent appeals.

*On a second appeal, rulings made prior to the former appeal and which might have been then passed on will not be reviewed.-Alabama City, G. & A. Ry. Co. v. Bates (Ala.) 776.

*A decision on appeal is the law of the case on a subsequent appeal.-New York Life Ins. Co. v. McIntosh (Miss.) 401.

*A decree of the Supreme Court affirming a decree overruling a demurrer to a bill in a *Error in submitting to a jury on certiorari suit to cancel patents issued by the state held the question whether relator had filed a suffinot the law of the case on a subsequent appeal. cient answer as garnishee in the action before-Creegan v. Hyman (Miss.) 952. the justice of the peace on which the jury returned a negative finding held harmless.-Arky 822. Determination and disposition of v. Cameron (Miss.) 54, 170.

*Where a case is close on the facts, an erroneous charge on the burden of proof is reversible error.-Stewart v. Graham (Miss.) 245. *Where only one of two suits for wrongful death was maintainable, and all of the damages sustained were recoverable in either, defendant was not prejudiced by the consolidation thereof. -Mobile, J. & K. C. R. Co. v. Hicks (Miss.) 360.

$ 18.

Harmless error in rulings on pleading.

*Plaintiff was not prejudiced by the sustaining of a demurrer to certain counts of the complaint, where he thereafter filed certain other counts pleading substantially the same cause of action.-Carleton v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co. (Ala.) 495.

cause.

An absolute decree dismissing a bill held subject to modification on appeal making it a dismissal without prejudice.-Collins v. Smith (Ala.) 986.

*Where members of a court sitting on a writ of error or appeal are equally divided, the judg ment of the lower court will be affirmed.Randall v. L'Engle (Fla.) 2.

*Where members of a court sitting on a writ of error or appeal are equally divided. the judzment of the lower court will be affirme LNichols v. Lewis (Fla.) 2.

*Where the members of the Supreme Court are equally divided, the judgment of the lower court should be affirmed.-Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. McIntosh (Fla.) 291.

*Where the declaration describes a railroad company as organized under the laws of Virgin*Where defendant on facts proved under ceria, but by a clerical misprision in the judgment tain pleas was entitled to a general affirmative against it it is described as organized under charge given, it was immaterial whether the the laws of Florida, it is no ground for reversal, court erred in overruling demurrers to other but the error will be corrected.-Seaboard Air pleas.-Winn v. McCraney (Ala.) 854. Line Ry. v. Harby (Fla.) 590.

Error, if any, in sustaining a demurrer to special pleas, held harmless.-Gainesville & Gulf R. Co. v. Peck (Fla.) 1019.

Though a bill to recover under a contract of sale for a failure to deliver the goods was probably demurrable for failing to make a certain allegation, the case held not reversible on that ground. in view of the evidence.-American Steel Hoop Co. v. Searles Bros. (Miss.) 411.

A judgment nonsuiting defendant on his reconventional demand will be affirmed, where that branch of the case should in justice to all parties be tried de novo.-Prevost v. Rodriguez (La.) 19.

Where judgment was rendered for defendant as of nonsuit, and defendant appealed, praying to have the judgment made absolute, and plaintiff prayed for no alteration of the judgment. *Point annotated. See syllabus.

*Award considered, and held not uncertain.In justice court, see "Justices of the Peace, § 3. Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. Roussell (Ala.)

Liability of employer for defects, see "Master for damages, a compliance with Civ. Code 1896, and Servant," § 4.

Of assets of partnership, see "Partnership," § 2. for damages, a compliance with Civ. Code 1896,

*Point annotated. See syllabus

sworn in accordance with Civ. Code 1896, § 515.
-Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. Roussell
(Ala.) 866.

ARGUMENT OF COUNSEL.

See "Trial," § 2.

In an action for assault, plaintiff held entitled
to prove the statement made by defendant to a
witness as to what he did to plaintiff on the
day of the difficulty.-Irby v. Wilde (Ala.) 451.

In an action for assault, the judgment of con-
viction of defendant in a criminal prosecution
for the assault and battery is not admissible
in mitigation of exemplary damages.-Irby v.

In criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," Wilde (Ala.) 454.
§ 21.

Habeas corpus to procure discharge from ar-
rest, see "Habeas Corpus," § 1.

Illegal arrest, see "False Imprisonment."

§ 2. Criminal responsibility.

A husband who immediately shoots at the
man whom he finds in the act of adultery with
his wife held guilty of assault and battery with
a weapon.-Logan v. State (Ala.) 480.

On a trial for assault and battery, the ques-
tion of premeditation is not in issue.-Brooke
v. State (Ala.) 491.

On a trial for assault and battery, questions
asked accused as to why he carried a walking
cane are objectionable, as calling for the un-
State (Ala.) 491.

Justifiable homicide by person authorized to communicated intentions of accused.-Brooke v.
make, see "Homicide," § 4.

ARREST OF JUDGMENT.

In criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law,"
$ 32.

ARSON.

Evidence of confession, see "Criminal Law,"
$ 15.

*Corpus delicti in case of arson defined.
Spears v. State (Miss.) 166.

*A structure held a part of a dwelling house,
within Code 1906, § 1036, defining arson.-
Spears v. State (Miss.) 166.

On a trial for assault and battery, proof of
the physical condition of accused is inadmissi
ble.-Brooke' v. State (Ala.) 491.

Under Cr. Code 1896, § 4345, accused, on
trial for assault and battery, held entitled to
show in evidence an editorial published by pros
ecutor.-Brooke v. State (Ala.) 491.

*On a trial for willfully shooting at another.
it was for the jury to determine whether under
would never have reached the person shot at.-
ordinary circumstances the ball in the pistol
State v. Anderson (La.) 357.

*On a trial for willfully shooting at another.
a charge that the marksmanship of defendant
was not pertinent to the issue was not ground

Evidence held to justify a conviction of ar- for reversal, so long as the shooting was in-
son.-Spears v. State (Miss.) 166.

In an action for assault and battery, an in-
struction that if plaintiff provoked and brought
on the difficulty he cannot recover punitive
damages is erroneous.-Abney v. Mize (Ala.)
230.

*In an action for assault and battery, an in-
struction that, if plaintiff provoked or brought
on the difficulty, and it would not have occur-
red but for the wrongful conduct of plaintiff,
then he cannot recover, is erroneous.-Abney
v. Mize (Ala.) 230.

tentional and was within range.-State v. An
derson (La.) 357.

*On trial for willfully shooting at another, an
instruction that, to convict, it must appear that
the shooting was done willfully, deliberately,
and intentionally and with a bad purpose, was
sufficient.-State v. Anderson (La.) 357.

ASSESSMENT.

ASSETS.

*In an action for assault and battery, an in-
struction held erroneous as invading the pro-
vince of the jury and instructing a finding for Of partnership, see "Partnership," § 2.
defendant, although more force may have been
used than was necessary for self-protection.-
Abney v. Mize (Ala.) 230.

In an action for assault and battery, it was
proper to charge that, if one defendant aided,
abetted, or encouraged the other defendant in
entering into or continuing an unlawful assault
on plaintiff, then he would be responsible for
whatever such other defendant did in the fur-
therance of such assault, though he may not
have explicitly encouraged, aided, or abetted
any one particular act of such other defendant.
--Abney v. Mize (Ala.) 230.

*In an action for assault and battery, the
replication held good on demurrer.-Abney v.
Mize (Ala.) 230.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS.

see

See "Appeal and Error," §§ 2, 4, 9; "Criminal
Law," §§ 38, 40.

ASSIGNMENTS.

Documentary evidence in action on assignment,
Fraud as to creditors, see "Fraudulent Convey-
see "Evidence," § 7.

ances.

Of laborer's lien, see "Master and Servant,"
§ 2.

Of lease, see "Landlord and Tenant," § 2.

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

Of risk by employé, see "Master and Servant," Remitting by, of damages for failure of county
§§ 8, 10.

*Point annotated. See syllabus.

BILL OF PARTICULARS.

involuntary bankrupt held amendable so as to
deprive the court of jurisdiction.-McAfee v.
Arnold & Mathis (Ala.) 870; Same v. Wallen- See "Pleading," § 6.
haupt (Ala.) 873.

Under Bankr. Act July 1, 1898. c. 541, §
38. cl. 4, 30 Stat. 555 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p.
3436), the referee held to have jurisdiction to
appoint a receiver so as to place the property
in the custody of the court rendering void sub-
sequent garnishment proceedings taken against
it.-McAfee v. Arnold & Mathis (Ala.) 870;
Same v. Wallenhaupt (Ala.) 873.

§ 2. Assignment, administration,

and
distribution of bankrupt's estate.
An answer to a bill by a bankrupt's trustee,
to set aside certain conveyances as fraudulent,
held insufficient and to amount to an admission
that the conveyances were fraudulent and that
the bankrupt was seised and possessed of the
land within four months prior to the filing of
the bankruptcy petition.-Prestridge v. Wallace
(Ala.) 970.

§ 3. Rights, remedies, and discharge of
bankrupt.

Where an estate was in the custody of a feder-
al district court as a bankrupt estate at the
time property of the estate was garnished, the
garnishment proceedings could not be main-
tained without the previous consent of the bank-
ruptcy court.-McAfee v. Arnold & Mathis
(Ala.) 870; Same v. Wallenhaupt (Ala.) 873.

BAR.

BILLS AND NOTES.

Determination and disposition of cause on ap-
peal in action on note, see "Appeal and Er-
ror," § 22.
Garnishment of maker of note, see "Garnish-
ment," § 1.

Of corporations, see "Corporations," § 3.
Operation and effect of usury, see "Usury." § 1.
Pleading alteration of note, see "Alteration of
Instruments.'

Pleading defenses in general in action on note,
see "Pleading," § 2.
Presentation of note as claim against decedent's
estate, see "Executors and Administrators,"
$ 4.
Restraining action on note, see "Injunction,"
§ 2.

§ 1. Requisites and validity.

*A note executed by an illiterate promisor
by his mark held sufficient without attesta-
tion; Civ. Code 1896, § 1, being inapplicable.-
McGowan v. Collins (Ala.) 228.

that he did not read the fine print on its face.-
One who signs a note cannot set up a defense
Bank of Morgan City v. Herwig (La.) 611.
§ 2. Construction and operation.
*Under stipulation in note for attorney's fees.

Of action by former adjudication, see "Judg- maker held liable to payee for fees paid to

ment," § 8.

Pleas in bar, see "Pleading," § 2.

BATTERY.

See "Assault and Battery."

BENEFITS.

Acceptance of, as ground of estoppel, see "Es-
toppel," § 2.

Acceptance of, as waiver of right to appeal, see
"Appeal and Error," § 3.

See "Wills."

BEQUESTS.

BEST AND SECONDARY EVIDENCE.

attorney employed in collecting note.-Bank of
Duncan v. Brittain (Miss.) 163.

*A note executed within the state, but payable
in another state, must be governed by the law
of that state, though given for the price of
property and reserving title to the property un-
til full payment.-Lienkauf Banking Co. v.
Haney (Miss.) 626.

§ 3. Negotiability and transfer.

bale of cotton, with bill of lading attached.
An accepted sight draft for the price of a
held governed by the commercial law.-Bank
of Guntersville v. Jones Cotton Co. (Ala.) 971.
$ 4. Rights and liabilities on indorse-
ment or transfer.

Where notes were indorsed as an accommoda-
tion and accepted by the payee to secure a debt,
the notes are not taken out of the category of
ordinary commercial paper.-Bank of Morgan
City v. Herwig (La.) 611.

In civil actions, see "Evidence," § 3.
In criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," of Morgan City v. Herwig (La.) 611.
§ 11.

Credit given the maker of a note is a suffi-
cient consideration to bind the indorser.-Bank

BIAS.

Of juror, see "Jury," § 3.

BILL OF DISCOVERY.

See "Discovery," § 1.

BILL OF EXCEPTIONS.

See "Exceptions, Bill of."

BILL OF EXCHANGE.

See "Bills and Notes,"

BILL OF LADING.

See "Carriers," § 1.

Where a note is valid between the holder and
the maker, it is sufficient to bind the indorser.-
Bank of Morgan City v. Herwig (La.) 611.

§ 5. Actions.

Failure to sue on a note is not ground for re-
lease of the maker or the indorser who are not
prejudiced by delay.-Bank of Morgan City v.
Herwig (La.) 611.

In an action on a note against the indorser.
the contention that there was an agreement
whereby plaintiff obtained the indorsement for
his own benefit in order to be able to obtain a
loan thereon held not sustained by the evidence.
-Bank of Morgan City v. Herwig (La.) 611.

BLOOD HOUNDS.

Competency in criminal prosecution of evidence
as to conduct of, see "Criminal Law," § 10.
*Point annotated. See syllabus.