Newspaper Page Text
peel*
SCHEME C0URT_0F GEORGIA.^
ni Rendered Tuosdnir. November
||, 1834.
l«W ,u - ,r ; T "in,' ^n'n^Mon.
i§ssmb
ml giving nomrlty; In no other n
< (’ode. MU :82l; 4'* Gi-, 4*0;
1 —felt d*u , " T,,t
i f..r j.lalnt ID:
she ackcowler*
the money irom him
Iher's executors hu<1 fc
isfucllon, etc., of al
of the part* where it grows wish to wol_
inceeaaotlv they chew the leaves of the
I shrub, ami while the effect* last, they are
*te j not b .there! with any feelings ot hunger
! or thirst. As administered medicine, if, is
' dissolved in a mixture of hydrochloric ac-
; id and an alkali, that being the form most
! favorable for its use.
3 ™
, Wwataa m jtenasftjs
owed the delenaim■ which inch tic-
.'U ug on a proraluorf n uW noll! having
(cu'laut was tue Irfc duB t0 another, would
!* ce nmtected^rom paying money under the
he proteewu •‘■j, i , B n n money bail
BKp!8K& no Judgment rendered .galu.t
"* WgV?.“wM S
the At!
tb« liable ns surety, wet
pavl* contra.
gSmpuSK JSqaWOoM. Increaia. Uc.d
" > j_i if a head ol afamllyhss
this own Individual right, where-
f there Is a theory
supported hy evl-
adletod by other evidence
In the case then tbejnry woo'd be anthbrUed
to adopt the same, unless th
that the witnesses who supported it wore un
worthy of credit." was properly refund.
Even if sound In principle, ** J***.*®®Tftf*?
and gene al. and it Vs not specifically
to any facU In proof. It might have mis’ed
the Jury and It.is difficult to h°wit
cou’fl have aided them. Kllnk vs. Boland,
**4.* Thenewlydiscovered evidencelimerely
cumulative, and might by the exercise of
proper diligence have been procured la time
°5, lu/the duty of a railroad company to
furnish Us employes with reasonably safe
materials and tools for their use. while
working !n lte service; but if the emplove
Is aware of the dsngeroui character of any
tl ular too? or ins mmentaud he continues
P"r r ft °oo^uncUon *wIth exempted prop*
w l l ’h i n mSes increase la tho shape of other
e rty, ire makt" lucr^ u would require
ot .uch luereMO .houldgoto
S?wh»t“het exemption makes .upplemeuted
ISSrsOTssSI
ggSS$sWK
ffft/S. 378. judgment alllrmed.
K B. M Davis for plaintiff; Duncan and Miller
contra.
a...,.., Ti . Friend. Foreclosure of mortgage,
®*JrrmBlbb. Before Judge Simmons. »l*r-
&“women. Security. PronU.ory note,.
nSJSSs! C 0, j!-A note and mortgage glTcn
ssraraKSnwMSftM
.here a note and morteue were gWen
i . . married woman to her son-in-law for the
aceoro modatlon ol the .ou-m-law. ea a loan
2nd without consideration, it seems that a
«S?phMer after maturity could not enforce
Elfesfs 4
/fpmVndcd Dock the note and mortgage before
'iSKTS o“ r .h.m' for plaintiff; A. Proud lit,
Save? ^'oTsiwon, T>. Harris. Equity.
*£p5 Bibb. Before Judge JMnMjwn*. *qoIty,
Dcinurre*. Municipal corporations, street
railway company charter. Damages. Injunc-
C. J.-l. A bill filed by a citizen of
UuAsimt the city of Mscon the Macon
haiiwav Compauy, the Bibb Manurac
KrISi Company, an f other., alleging. In eub-
atance that complainant It acltlxen of Maeo t
irnf owner of property on the attest on which
hermldas: that the Street Hallway Company
wuichartered for nubile and not private PJir-
JSLr.nd us**, and while steam could be used
KTJSuh tUS consent ol the city It could
SJt"? done fur private »»! that eteem wea
nUtr no u-.-i bv the consent of tho city. In
Suit the B?bb Manufacturing Company’ em-
; , i. f or .ho conveying of coal and other
material* that the city contracted with the
manufacturing company to allow ihls privi-
lege to the railway company, in cpusldera.
tion of a certain sum and in consideration
that the manufacturing company would «are
harml.es the city from an. ' «mi«o arUlng
from use ol steam; that the contract la
made betwe u the street railway waitttf
and manufru t irlug company of tne one pari,
anl the city ol thu other part; that tbo
, , „u l charging both pad and lu
ll.-■ ;.I r-u rtty, etc., and that tho
SieVtu'v me Jtlouc I -luea not extend to dtm-
„ , to property hoi it-rs, to that he could re-
cover ,11 r- i lly from the ixnulacturtng com-
i.sny leaving him noremetyet lewhutono
au Insolvent slro t railway company
Siilch had long ! toheopcMto! for pul>-
11,. t|... ft „ not without equity.
J. Theie Is equity in the MU esegeloetthe
Ci ti’n Vr the cfta-i irof the street railway com-
eattv ar e „( 1- s 107 ami 1OT, tho City
p ■ tiy the right to nse
)iic * ‘ ‘ * '
pa tl ular tool or ins rumens ana uv
to two ft. he cannot hare redress for any dam
age he may sustain by tts «se 60 Go. 405, 66
Ga. IS; OS Ga. 699,706:70 Ga 566,868.
Nor floes it alter tfie rule that an employe
knowingly using a dangerously defective tool,
does »o under the immediate orders of a su
perior employe. 70 Ga. «»•?,»» e.nd ^jejeited.
6. It is iuslsted that, even If Plaintiff did not
know the defective nature of the brake by
which he was hurt, it waa his duty to inspect
it, and by an ordinarily cireful inapwtlon h®
could hare discovered the defect. But It Is
doubtful whether such a duty was Imposed on
the plaintiff (a brakeman) by any ruleof the
company or custom o< Jt *. ^ e f , «P!2I5^JUii!
there were such a custom, that It was known
^In the aSJence of evidence it does not follow
that a hand whose duty It Is to apply *»•"
brakes, has snffldout skill to determine I
fitness for use by an inspection.
Central rallroa«1 vs. Kenny. 58 Ga. 485 cited
and distinguished. Diswnting opinlon of
Jackson. J., in tame cue, 64 Ga. 100, cited and
''^Thels’vidence is conflicting and sustains
though it does not require tho finding. Judg-
m T? B* CabanUa by Ha riaon A Pecplei, John
I. Hall for plaintiff; Milledtro & Smltp, T. P.
Westmoreland, Berner A Turner contra.
Shuford vs. Alexander. Certiorari, from
Walker. Before Judge Branham.. Evidence.
Fraud. SActfon. Coi
aci ion. Remedy.
tcr», inc
‘ i trad
Held: . ;. . . . I
. do far as the intention of testator
;hercd from thts obacure and lily express d
, we think he designed to give Mrs. Cook,
mother of plaintimi below, a life estate
only in tl»e p operty conveyed, with remain
der to the children 1 vlngat ,
will was executed tp I8»and tookeff ct In
1S Tho legislation of 1821 and J85I forbade.the
presumption or Implication of an estate tall,
Sod where, by the fcngll-h roles iMeonxtnwj
Hon, • itvli xn eeute would hxve tajracremtm
by DnpllmUou, onutxtute meantthot allfe
estate should be vested In the first taker.with
remainder in fee to hia children and Uiaif de
scendants. Code 2260: 9l and cose* cited,
lb. 2248, 2210; Nussbaum A Danuenberg vs.
Evans, executor. Sept, term IK*-'.
2. While it is not clear from the Item* men
tioned that testator intended to ooovey by ntt
will the land mentioned, or in Jfhat way at
the time of the making of the will, whether
a gift or loan. 1 **"
d her husband;
■■ k im v* iuoui it was held by tbo ^£7
and her husband ; yet from another item and
from a colic 11 to testator's wlU, as well as
from evidence u to the chaiact^r of the de
visee’s or her husband's possession, it seems
that in testator's view the property prevt
ously given off to his children wu convoyed
b3 In th?codlcll he stated that he had "willed’
the land mentioned iu the lest item alluded
to to his sou, and that hehadslncesold it.
and he substitutes for It other land and some
^Sla'indieote* that he claimed full domin
ion over the land he hod advanced to this
devisee. * t that t |j e husband ot If ra. Cook
3. it appear«that the hnsnanaoi mtb. ..
sold and conveyed the land first mentioned, N . y. A M. Lawrence vs. Hlx A High. MMff
xvhig.li (« tho Itiid in dispute, while he won r ile. from Chattooga. Before Judge Bran-
WOTr:
ts for public but not for prl-
UVombly had granted such
city it woul 1 have gone be
.ut it has not done ao. There
,r.l t<» enjoin tbo unwarranted
.tv and to etop the damage
iorit> bos ;>«rmlUed.
iiiity i.s ' ' • • i ' '
It i« a party to the contract
d a guarantor thereunder. It Is
v of tin* . ntlre scheme, and tho
bill i« f«»r damages In the put
,■ t on in tho future.
.«iulty ns against the street rail
f . it in tin* in-trumeut us .11**
ry and c infer the benefit, and is
art It'S to the contract, and as
r v party to the bill.. As the
» mi. ,tr it»r of tin- wrong, the injunction
for wool 1 bo vain unless It wero “
•ntract. Minor.
j.-3l‘The*proof in this case was suf-
uuiouh k> show a wilful misrepresentation of
material facta, or an artful eoucealraent of
them on the part of the plaintiff in e.ror, who
was dealing with a minor, over whom he
■eems to have had much influence, and to
show that said minor wat deceived aud mis
led Into taking worthies* note* in exchange
for his horse. Code 2958. ....
2. All the pleadings required in a Jnstlco s
court la a summons, to which is nttachcd tbo
cause of action on which
requirement was fully compiled with in this
cose, aud the facts set forth substantially
P ™ V The ootdnretoof an infant are void. Code
2731, In a suit Instituted in his behalf, cither
to recover property parted with by him or its
value, or ’daia*/. (or a fraud prard ce.1
upon him In iuch a transrctlou, an offer to
raaclnd the rontract, or to return tho property
he sot In exchange. H not an todljipeniahlo
prcreqnUlte to the maintenance ol the aeUon.
07 Haaa. Mt; M Amor. Doc. 1M;7 Oa. 508
(a) The defendant would not ho without hi*
romedr. howeror, to recover hla property. If
he lectflt to purxuc It. Judgment alHrmed.
,K. M. W. Glenn, H. P. Lumpkin, fin plain
tiff; F. W. Copeland, by Harrlion A Pceplei,
lLall'i Rueklo ra. C. F. Lorey. Claim, from
Floyd. Before Judgo Branham, galea. Cnn-
dltlotti. Title. Lien. Debtor and creditor
Hall J.-On April 1». mi, a itock ol drttra
wju soiTl and deliverea by Dabney A Co. to
Ix)rev under tho following instrument;
"Dabney A Co. agree to turn over to said
oreyupoia conditional aale tb«ir stock of
drug' and fixture* as perinrolcc agreed upon
by tnem, amounting to 6930, said Lorey agroc-
Ingto pay dow’i cJh f’XX) and to give banka
ble n ites for the baUnce as follow* • • •
Bald Lorey agrees to meet .each o
said notes as Uiey fall due, and shook
he fall to meet any of them at JjKjjSj-SK
Dabuey A Co. shall havo the right to enter and
recover their iutere*t in said stock of drugs
tho time of such default by going Into poss«
slon of oaid stock by virtue of this condition^
sale withont procosa of law-this transaction
being a sale o! conditions, sal 1 Dabuey A Co.
retaining an luterest in said stock and said
Ijorey being In possession of the same subject
to wUbln described conditions, aold Dabuey A
Co. agreeing to IBc the mortgage held upon
,, On , the k fourth day of May, 1*0, Jadgmr
wasobtalne<l against
16,1883, execution Usued thereon which w
levied on said stock, and a claim wa* Inter-
^HeldV L^tJc agreement vestod a defer
ble title In Low, subject to be diverted on his
failure to perform any of the stipulated condi
tions which by the term* of the agreement he
* »ind to perform. . .
It is not clear that it was the intention
nro private corporation*
i president or agent or pur-
be- interested In the subjeot
of tho suit, »■! they claim an Inters*t in
[«.l n\ » r th” -ir.-a railway franchise.
■ 1 nn attack made
base and title to the
.. street railway com
aln&nt, 1* advised to
onslderthe clmrgo
,ty, a* to the m»n-
ha* not been com-
ntract Itself being
•..oily i ithaprayer to enjoin
Ped<^8ee«.w(8005; «Ga.,
u 1. nillupa A Hardeuaiv
V. Whittle,
faa. Ccrtlr
;e Stewart.
which li the land In dUpule, while he was
living on It with hla family. » ll hont any
change of tmaseaelon or ownerahlp, ao aa to
notify otheni that the title waa othmwlM
than thepoaaea.lon would Indje.tJ, In hlaown
la claim; aivl that
oia n'ui.re poaaeaaleo and he
and thoae claiming un.lcr Win have been In
contlnuoua, unlnterrui.U-l. peecmble and ad
vene oosaoaalon of the premlaci more than
twcntyyoaraprevloualo the commencement
ol there aulte, aa tuna lide.purchaacra of
fee wlthmi’ notice of any tmat or clrcumxtanoc
‘%5}.f«tl?ni and Mcordlng to oiir In
terpretation of the Item of teatatoria wUl ap
pointing hla executor, tmiiteea W 'h'
nroneitv we think tneso irwee*
wens' uuateca for tho rcraaliulcrmen
as well aa for the Ufe tenaota, that the trust
waa not fully exeeuted by thedaath of the life
tenant but waa atilt executory, mostof the re
maindermen being at that t mo minora. J™®
aught that appears to the contrary thore la still
fn being a trustee who hold. thl. oaUte In re-
malnder, and thetltl. to It la In him; and^not
^(a)*’°It^a re«e?«rihat It waa tne mien.
^^‘^.^•..^'‘co^rt'ir 'before IKS®
should vest In him; the very mture of lh#
should vest In hlm;tbe veryu-ture ol
thing aold end tho disposition which It waa
evl lenlly contemplated Iho pure barer ahoald
malto of it, would lead to a different concln-
*'Kven If this Intention were more doubtful.
It would bo the duly of the'court to hold
these to bo conditions subsequent, liable, on
default Of the party making 'hem, to a for
telturc of the pr peity sold and delivered
Code 773 >; 15 Qa 101. , ,
J. II la only where the title li cxpreialy re
served by the seller, until the performance
, , ■ of some-condition by the buyer, that a third
lc defendant!baeaiisf .nbrequentlv acquiring a lien against
the seller can enforce It upon the property
aold, and thla he cannot do If ho had not 1 —
of tho traesaetton, for as between tho part
It la legal and valid. W U. S. il5; 1 BcnJ. -.
Sales, aco VI s . anil caaet cited; lb. see. <Jd,
and cates cited. Judgment affirmed.
Junius F. Hllljrtr for plaintiff; C. 5. Foath-
or.ton contra.
Grevctt ti. The Slate. KMnappimrfrom
Carroll, Before Judgo Harris, criminal
law. Statutory conatruetton. Jury. Cbarga
of tho coart, Erlle ce. Witness.
J.-Under section 43M of the codelf
one forcibly, maliciously or fraudulently
I ' • V
Oulre routed land to miuips lor which ho
u-j, m ,.jvt» two 1m.*'a ol cotton, anti tnat
afterwards McGuire paid * prevlsioa debt for
Phillips end, Morris for wnioh ho bad be,
conte lo'urity.out rf tbu iwoceeds of one bale of
cotton vr ich Phillips had paid him, it not
appearing that at tho time of such payment
Phillips know that McGuire had takeu up the
provision debt. It was error to charge the Jury
that if plaintiff hrld two debts against defen
dant, and defendant paid Mm a hale of cot
ton and did not direct how payment should
be applied, and that If plaintiff had purchased
n ovlsions for defendant In Atlanta and be
come security for defendant and had paid off
said provision debt, he would bo antnorUed
to apply said payment to either debt accord-
ln ?he *cbaSawS error, as it excluded from
the Jury tho question of defendant s Intention
al the time ho made the payment If be knew
U the existence of only one debt due by him
to plaintiff, ho might well bo presumed to
have delivered the cotton as payment on the
rent debt. Pritchard v*. Comer A Co., Sept,
torm 1843. Judgment reversed.
j. 8. James, by R. A. Massey, for plaintiff;
John V. Edge contra.
rrairri
W!TH COTTON.
H ARD TIMES NEARLY OVER
Afffarfoav liarvowt li m linad, aeg
l»r will Mi.fM, nrerali. fhaao.
«nila of fmnlllo* «in» h bi«n want*
(ng Pin,*..-* nud Org.% n for many Im(
tear* will lll’l Hilt Y V, \ g, Antleg.
I> stfme tlieilemninf, hc limn
DOUBLED OCI! CONTRACTS with MIXERS
hi* part or Stl
induced to ins
the receipt, she would n
years alter the settlem<
the same. Code, roc. 18j
4. If said settlement
fraud and misrepresent
then she would not bo b
ha l elapsed after the«i;-
CodeZul.
*(a) Code sec. 1317 and *2931 must be
ation of the tr
treed until ten j
tcveryo/ the U
In iho remaindermen. He »b ? uM h.ve .ucd
for it and If a prescriptive title would have
avail' d to defeat au action t> which hewii*
party, it wquld be equally available against
“2? While it la true that where one having
a life estate, unencumbered with % trust, or
encumbered with a trust that does not extend
beyond the tcn*ncy f for life, sell* and con
veys tho fee. prescription does not begin to
run against {he remaindermen until the ter
mination of the life estate, dissenting opinion
2f Walker, J., in 36 Georgia, 26,D>Goor8ia.
527, Bull et al. va. Porter »
term. 1883; ret tho fact of the title to the re
maindermen being held by a trustree who had
notire of the adverse character of be <de
fendants' claim and holding, »n^ l wbo 5£ji]‘!
have brought thia action at any time within
tho period prescribed by law makes that rule
Inapplicable here, and the trustee having
ailed to bring the suit in time, he and those
ho represented are now barred.
The case of theCity Connc llo! .AjgjaUr>.
UadclliTo et al., 66 Ga. 469. dlffera from thla
case. I n that case the defendant claimed tttlo
under tho trust and that tho conveyance was
a xood execution of tho power to sell, li* title
was derived directly from the trustee aa auch,
S!d It wa* charged with fall notice of plaln-
In thla* ease defendants bought from the
tt iistee but without notice of the trust and
bought frem ln“V„lndlri'lual gf-W;
Hence, under 3 Kelly 256, 2K2, ^ij they
held adversely to their vendor^ fight* os
trustee, and he necessarily had notice ol tbU
adverse holding. .fSatofStfca 9 ’ 51 Ga.
1IV: 56G* 26 Jndgment reversed.
G. W. Bryan, W. T. Dlc w “" ,n ~ ?-
Spears A Simmons contra.
Kirk v* the State. Murder from Polk. Be
fore Judge Branham. Cnmlual law. Evl
dcnco. Jury. Separation. Waiver. K«**c®*
tae. Practice. Newly discovered evidence.
Hall, J.—1. The verdict Is sustained by tho
°ffliof indictment against the accuaed
for retailing liquor without license, on which
the name of deceased was- marked as a wit
ness. was properly admitted. It [uroUhed a
raoti • for ocnnectlnf accused with the com
mission of the offense Tor which he was being
tried, and corroborated a POrOoaoJItai dying
declaration of deceased, that "that true bUi
was the cause of his being killed.
(a) No specific groundof
tion to this evMenco waa st
and this, of Itself, would be j
reason for not considering the objection.
sTwhere a bailiff leave* tho Jure to
chargo In the htreets of a town and during
| absence a portion of ihcra separate from
r lie, from <
ham. Lane
iiL-V.HDf i.'.r*. J.—Thln
the case of W
2 Where a landlord has two claims for sup-
ies one In tho shape of a note and the other
open account, It !•* not necessary thst he
>uld consolidate them before foreclosure;
may foreclose them separately. Judgment
rtf \V. r M. J ilenre, F. W. Copeland, by Harrison
Peeples, for plaintiffs; J M. llellah, contra.
Reaadjudicata. Life tenant Mortgage. Con
sent. BUte demand.
Blakdposo, J.—Th©decision made in this
care, «8Ga. ',3'.while It la ffUapprovod bj-
'; reaadjudicata, and It inuataund.
X While a Ufa tenant who waa «ul Juri,
mleht content that a ttuitee could raise
money for I he tone lit of tho entire citato by a
mortgage ol her life eatato, yet her consent to
a mortgaging of tho entire citato will not be
held to be equivalent to content that her life
estate might be aeparate'.y mortgaged, (a) It
■eema that this oueatlon waa alio paaicd on
when thecaiewai here before, a ivanely to
Pl | l tVhere^eroaa-bUl a partyietanpade-
J Half* auViirBacon A Rutherford, E F.
Best, for plaintiff; Lyon A Gresham conffo.
CaM**n et al. v». Barrett etol, commloaloners.
Refusal of Injunction, from Pike. Before
JadKc suwart. Local option act. Equity.
Jurisdiction. Constitutlonallaw.
Blakdford, J.—1. Under a bUl filed to en
join tha consolidation of vote* cast and declar
ation of the result of an election held under a
oeal option act for Plko county, which act
was pa^sid September 18, 1883, we think the
constltutioualltyof iheact cannot bo Inquired
strued in pari materia. ^ ho first docs not
fer to or embrace a fr i udu’ent acttleme...,
while the Utter section di jkjs. In the first tho
G riod of limitation It . four years, in the
it it is the general rtat| |te of Ualtattons af
ter the discovery of th t fraud. 24 Ga. 673.
Judgment reversed.
II ill. J , concurred, bn, J furnished no writ
ten opinion.
Jackson, C. J., conec^p.- pd, but differed from
tho opinlrn of tho other Justices ns
to the period of li piltatlon In cose
of fraud, holding tbit such period li four
rears from the tim*. i if discovery of the
'laud.
J. A. Blanco, Dabney «S i Fouche. Fulton Col
ville. for plaintiff; Ijt F*. Thompson, E. N.
Broyles, contra.
objec-
matter,
his absence a portion of inein separavo irom mafters arising out of such elections :
theirjhdlows, the presumption generally would ^ ^ etcrm jnod nlono by the tribunal constitir
whire prlnner's counrel know ol the (axt bw-
versed with them, hut It 1* shown that he tii
»<» a 1
arrant, pr-.vi
ower of tho
C«Je 4010,
Fr * ia“t ’■ plaintiff; JohnF.
consent »• >»v» r - -•■r
substitute his power, dominion enstod
cnnlrol tor that ot iuch (.rent orguaiV
ho I, rilHy ol klilnapplng; or, If tho i hllff
h*va no nsr ut or guardian and such leading,
then ho would bo guilt/ of kidnapping.
The statute evidently waa mica t for the
protection of the right* of a parent nr an >rll*n
if there b; one or if none, then lor tbo pro
tectloil of the liberty of the child.
2. When a Jury asks to be recharge 1 upon
the law of the cue upon Mrtieular qucs'lou^,
it is not necessary for the court in rcneoi *t
entire charge. All that (a necessary i« Ui-tt tha
charge should present both aspect® of the
case, and should call the attention of t»• Jury
to that flew of the facta consistent urnli tiiaj*
re nee, as well as the ono suggesting gui»». J l
G Thhrulc seems to have been fully complied
with In this case. Beside*, defendant and hU
counsel were pratcut, aequlcsclng, and osau i
no additional uifirui-ilon.
3, H was c mipitt nt p. pnve th\t prosecutor
/a* unwilling I hat hi* minor child nhouM bti
taken, carried or doooyed *w .y an 1 auy ef
forts that he nud>;
ggmi—!■
(a) Koowleffga nl tbl* fft w.t oloarly
bronght home t * defcndoni. but it was not es-
acutitl to Uie rui't of d •fendantlHat hr should
have been notified of iho tatorr'a nowming;
ne»s to relinquish d uulul m over hia child
and of ail the rjrouiu^ancc* ihit rcudrd to
demonstrate hi* parpos*. , . .
6, Libel ior divorce, waicn defendant had
filed ngaiust Ills wife -waa id«lt»iWo
atrengihui and corp>i» .ratt* the pf-nds of th-i
State. The fact met *t »»tsbli*he I was al
ready In evldtuce on tbo pare of iho uefeud-
ant. aud had U been objeetiouabb otherwise,
~ - -- fi| does not seem that U aav, wu af4 at
„ „ m , see what injury it could have done
defendant.
5. There was no error In excluding evidence
f prosecutor's harnh treatment of his family:
'hetber ho trcalc<l tlicm kindly or otherwise
their aworo
4, 8ee70GaTl'3\ 161; oede I73\ 1768, IT4.
5. The admission of a bill of indictment
S alnstone who was not a patty or witness lu
e case, but who was a l r6ther-in-law of de
fendant, while It might have been error, wu
cured by Its subsequent withdrawal. It mast
be presumed, in the absence of a contrary
averment, that It was not afterward* Instated
on or alluded to, and that its withdrawal was
accompanied by proper instructions from the
court 1 Under torse circumstance# it Is not an
indispensable presumption that Its temporary
olrnUslon hart defendant. . . .
r. Testimony of a statement made by de
ceased as to who shot him. made immediately
after the shooting, waa admissible as a part
of the res geata, and was also admissible in
this case to corroborate dying declaration*.
Ang. Factory B*rnc*; February term, ’864.
7. There is 2ethln»*» *-be sronuil as to per*
m!Uiu< counsel to discus* 'objection* to evi
dence Tn the heiring of the Jury. No request
waa mode to have tfie Jury sent out, and the
idenca wus not such as to require a prelim-
i ry i X'imfu t'on to determfuo Its admisd-
hr itv. T v ruling lu«5 (!*„ », and McDou;
. 4iate. b.»pt. term, 1883, doe* not apply,
b ru»* woo : discovered evidence only g
the iuipta Idng of one of tho Ht»tc.i w
,»u<. Hit- 70 Ga , 1 <6. Judgment atllriu> d
I. K. Tnomimu, Jos. Glenn for plaintiff;
5mien »n, aicorney F«««ral; J. I. Wright, so
Ucllor general, by *- W. Alexander ctmuo.
exi _'utor and truateu vs. Gray.
K ,uiiy, Ir Jin Bibb. Before Judge Cnuwe'l.
I’raetiee. New trial. Evidence. Chargo of
the court Directions.
Ht.ANDroaD, J.—Where by an order p a*e«l
in icrnt »liuc plaintiff in error w^* given
arerttln day la vacaUon toprep r- bis .
fo new trial and briet «*; ovldeiMv. and
snb-tcqueut day of tho same tetm tue
»wa* eularged, and counsel for th i oiiter
aide did not consent to these orders, appeared
at the time fixed for hearing tae motion ai
i.Jci tcd thereto,but, his obiectlon being over
uLd.dldnot except, he la precluded and
si mot take advantage of the error by motiou
Dili*ml:s here.
i It was error to reject the testimony
f Vlleu Kennedy and John D.Gray, thi * * —
had known defen lant in error from his
up to the time when they testified, that he waa
not of sound min d and capable ol mam
hla property. It has already been rub _
this court that this evidence was admissible,
69 < la. 675
It la Insisted that Its exclusion did not hurt
plain iff in error, that the Jury by their verdict
round that defendant in error was of uruoanr!
mind wbeo his father's will was made, and
tbot ibis testimony could only relate to rbe
condition of the mind of defendant in error at
that time, the testimony having been takeu
by commission ten years before this trlaL
We cannot say what affect the evidence
wo rid hare had. It fs from persons intimate
ly a<*quainted with defendant in error, and
2. The act was not unconstitutional, be
cause U submitted to a vote of tho people tho
question as to whether its provisions should
bo put in operation. If the constitution, the
organic law of the State, has been made to
depend upon the vote of tho people, it i< not
lyCKJJC/ s t/VU. JJIU1., HO, «>•"
3. Th« body of the act contains nothing In-
consistent with or rartant Irom 1U title.
4. Tho ant does not contain moro than one
•object matter. The aublect matter, the pur
pose ol tho act. I, to pronJe a mean, ol pre-
Kmtag ItonortraJTlc In KkawunOrHtte pfo-
plo thereof to desire, and all the provlatoniol
the bill ate xermaln to and In lortheranee ol
!“it pnrpore. Hope et .1,TSjMayo-,ele.,of
GaluesvlVc, Fobrnary term, 1381. , ,
5. The act Is uot unconstitutional &s violat
ing a general law In rogar I to elections.
There is no general law in force In this State
os to elections el this chirocter. •
6. There U uo equity In complalnonant s
bill; the subject matter ot the bill is clearly
outside of the subjects of cquitv Jurisdiction.
Tne matters s 2t forth in tho bill arc of a pollti
cal natnre not airt-ctlDg property, and chan
cery hu no Jurisdiction of the same. High on
Inf. 1,258; Ikilglitly’s Dig.of Elec. C17; 7b 111.
26j; Illrh on Inf. I Tem. Ch. 418.
(a) \V“en the Legislature provides for on
elec tion to determine a ques ion of the kind
sot forth in the act in question, and there is no
provision mtde in the law for Judicial Inter
ference, and there is no statute authorising
such Interference, and ho authority exist*
at common law lor the same, then nei
ther a court of law or equity has pow
er or Jurisdiction over the
.tiers
tod by tho Legislature for Hint purpose, aud
the courts are powerless to interfere unless
legislature In their wisdom shall *
>erTo<
power
ited iu
al vs. .
this term. 4he question was directly made,
(U) Tuis was Intimated In CD Ga. 283, aud in bass.
th« case of skrino el. al rs. Jackson et aL f *t “And the drlnki,
Hawkins et al. vs. Gil mn, Son A Co. Com
plaint, from FloyfL- Ji efore/uflgc Branham.
Principal (and seen iti;. Novation. Dis
charge. Consent*
Blandfobd. J.—1. W1 »ere a note was given
by one as principal and another as securitv to
a third parry wlmtransf erred it os collected to
the defendant Iu . error, and tho consideration
of the note was the perf brnance of a contract
be tween tho principal a nd the payee, wherebv
the payee was to const ign to said princ pul
certain goods at his low est oh«rg<>*, aud when
solo the amount charge* J was to bo paid over
to the payee in day» i or deposited in bank
on account; and the got >ds were to be sold op
commission, or per cenrL over the prices the
payee put on the goo* Is, aud the principal
agreed to. deposit colli (teral security to the
••• !' I1 • - '!■<■ II.'- p it ’ll. nt
of any money receive*I on account of said
♦’ales, and afterwards the principal made de
fault and the payee tools from him a note and
mortgage, and foreclosed the mortgage, bat
realised only a small amount there.rom; the '
Security was not discharged by the taking of i
the second note and mortgage It was not a '
novation but an Additional security, <
(a) As no particular time was specified la,
the contract for the naymentof the money,
the blank therein wUl be held to mean within
a reasonable time or at such time as mlgh^
be thereafter agreed on.
2. Even If the aecimd arrangement would,
ordlnarlb , discharge the stir ty thore is
sufficient evidence to show that ih* surety
consented thereto. Section 09 Georgia 354
Judgment alllrmed.
Dabney A Kouohc for plaintiff; Panloi S.
Prlntnp, contra
SHAVEN AFTER TWENTY-FOUR YEARS.
And Then He Presents «In Beard to
President dltslsnd.
N. Y. Star.
Nex*!” sung oat the barb?r at the sec
ond chair in Mayers’s barber Bhop in
Chatham street yesterday afternoon. A
tall, grizzled man started to hti feet and
bfgsn nn winding a silk handkerchief from
his neck. When it was clear a beard un
rolled itself until it fell in a wiry tangle
down on his breast, unfolding until it
touched the floor and concealed the figure
of the customer.
The barbers stopped work with a start
that .Jeopardized three customers’ noses.
• Gotti What’s this l” said the boss.
"Don't be afraid, it's only me,” said a
voice percolating with eolUn efltcts
through the wiry jungfe.
"Is there a man actually concealed in
that bale of hair,” excl timed the funny
man of the Star, who was waiting his turn.
• There is, young fellow, and don’t you
forget it when yon as# the scissors, Mr.
Buber,replied the voice from tilt hair.
"Himmel! How did you get so?
ssked the barber of the second chair.
" Through politics/ replied tangle.
“Politic*V choronseu customers and
barbers.
"Yes, politics. Give me a shave and I il
t?li you all about it, set up the drinks,
too.
All the enstomera waited an 1 some went
■ nr, and brought in fri'-ni* to wut.to)
The barber tackled the hair and after a
tusil# of twenty minutes got the better of
it. A good-looking, mddy-f.ice.l man of
middle age emerged under the raajic
touch of the artist.
"Now, we’ll have your yarn,” said tho
»ve to pr- i-cl in fi
mt was made to open i
The new t3
Induced by oculists inn
trod'.Ktion into Am<*rhn another use h 13
bo-11 found for i:. Frequently in diagnos
ing affections of tho eye it Is necessary to
apply some lotion that will enlarge the
pupil so that it can be moro easily exam-
’tied. Tiie drugs previously ft iho for
this purpose had the disadvantage that
wben once applied the expansion of the
pupil would oontlnne for a week, causing
gre.it inconvenience to the patient. The
enlargement obliterates the appreciation
of distance When cocaine is applied,
however, it is said that the expansion on
ly last! a few hours.
Before operating with ita assistance,
Hr. Shakspeare. the ophthalmic surgeon
to the Phiiad<'i|»ijaA Hospital, tried it-i ef
fects on himself, on the resident physician
in chirgeof the eye wards, on one of tho
surgeons and on a nurse. The results
were good After that various operations
were gone through without giving pain to
the patients. In one case the pupil of
the eye was grasped nod tfie eye.specula
ntrodaced without any excfamatlon
from the perron undergoing the opera
tion. In another the patient could not
open his eye without experiencing great
ag >ny from th*- I ght. The cocaine, how
ever, relieved him entirely in eighteen
minutes. The eflect lasts usually about
half au hour. At a clinic. Dr.* Shake
speare performed tho operation of prelim
inary irridectoray on a woman. The pa
tient sat in a chair, ami the eye wis gra^p-
• <1 with a forceps and several punctures
Wf-re made. Tne woman did riot so much
no. wince. The severance of the iris, how-
id a lively pain
till* l -fill, UUSPHWU "J *
fully considered, and dolled as above.
We are entirely satisfied with that decision,
aud think It control* the p;,'ient cose. Judg
ment affirmed.
.1 v. Redding, W. t*. WMtsker, Tho*. R
vorscu wiw uisuii in** »* »• wviim —«»— Mill*, Boynton Hamtncml for plaintiff: A,
1 ut, a new trial will not ts1 granted. a. Murphejr, J. A. Huntcontra.
All officers are presumed to havedischarged
their sworn official duties. I Kelly 3,36 Go.
■HipMMPMMPBpaldlog. iHDW
—iMcDanlel, Judge pro hoc vice. Promissory
notes. Transfsr. dccurity. ContracU. Ke-
fusal to charge.
Blamdfobd. j.—1. When a note Is trsnik
ferred which is secured by mortgage or other
security, it carries with ft the securities, and
the transferee would be entitled to have hla
debt paid first out of the money raised on the
security. 32 Go. 228; 33 Us. 452.
(a) But while this Is true as a general rale, I
tho parties may stipulate among themselves
a at tho money raiurd from tho security
Appropriated in a particular manner,
dlffereut from that in which the law would
appropriate the fund. 2 Jones on Mori. Sec
tion l?iki, I
f. Am there was somo evidence in this cave I
of such ao agreement. It was error for the
court to refuso a request to charge which sub
mitted to th** Jury tue question as to whether
Hintun vr. Goode A Crumley. Foreclosure ol
Hen, from Henry. Before Judge Hamr*''»»“•
laborers' liens. Statutory
Summary remedies.
Blanufoau, J.—1. Clerks, agents, casfilcrs
of bank* and alt ih*i <I»m «f employ
employtficnt i* sssoclsivi with men
s «d «ki!l. wi 10 4 t m»-4»M-n-d lab ...
w. re n«.l f« reuded *•> the -t cede 1974, to
b.* embrace 1 therein as labircia entitled to
a lit-n.
HI must b-t shown lhAfi that the
.'lain
ling tne lift
Go. 17.'t ti G i. tW.
a. t.-klug a «
»-lo -rly eiuiltcd lo it,
into affbrlintUto»e«nioi/ mast tn
not rued. V* Go. 161; >0Gx 104; 63
olefk.
>dy*
that the cocaine
in cases of operation*
1 " ivaatace
With its
re i. tho
im i
Dr. 8hak
ill be iovaloabl
for strabismus, where It
for tho patient to bo conscious,
se the eye can be properly adj
itient having his sight exp
ith by the use of lenses and re a a lag mat-
until r Iiit'j bt* -n li v- I to t!ie c irrect
decree. It will be useful, too, he says, to
give comfort to person s sutiering pain
fr..ii* *!,•• . \ • ..ir*- <>r irrit.ih -i .,f th**
rves of tfie eye and preliminary to
the application of caustic or other pain
ful dxugs
Dr. it. J. Levis has also experi
with the cocaine optl ’ *
on ted
rodneed local nr :i sthesia In
-r:tl tiitli-n-'it ; I.i • . When a j i -*I
prior to the brushing of ulcers in the
.-v.'i :u •! : 1 r*»tt v. ith nitri - a id, it
numbed the part, so that no pain was felt.
It al?o has ti»a property of removing tem
porarily the senses of taste and smell. To
do this it is applied to the tongue and in
side of the mouth and the upper part of
Short operations havo been
painlessly performed on the fingers after
they hhve been immersed for a snort time
in the solution.
IVEBRMTE5 RESPONSIBLE.
Tranco State of Drunkoiness and
and 'aid Inna lininnaMt stock -rfm
|M»rl> SanrniMorti* from ten Le»4fsg
Maker*, wlilcti we Nhnlt oflkroaov
m*mia1 nsy inNtalimmit Term*. T»se>
omniii’Mlstf thotn who wish to |«f
v,nnS hold tfh-ir rottou aaitll lafow,
make thin
Special offer to Piano and Organ
Buyers.
Vi us. with Tbraj .11 onths Time-
During tho months of Septem
ber and October, Is8|, we will
se 1 Pianos atnl Organs at our
Lowes (Rock Bottom Cash Pi ices,
requiring only ,
$25 CASH DOWN ON A PIANO.
$10 CASH DOWN ON AN^ROAR.
And allowing three months time
on the balance, without interest
or advance In price.
Those who buy
3 three months \
agreeing to pay our regular Installment
ic -s, and complying with our Installment
rmsofpayn
Mill he
further ti:
ument will be
*d fairly, and cl .
> with tho time required for tho purchase.
me.
tent
.Should they pay ono-haL
throe months, or make a
an equitable price for the
arranged. All will be
larked prices in accord-
ie required forthopui
lderthis Hpeclal offer 1
1 rod to sign our usual form of lease con-
let, aud furnish references as to their re-
onslbil'ty. InstrumentH will be sent on the
nut fifteen days trial, when references are
rcn.
LUDBEN & BATES’
SOUTHERN MUSIC HOUSE,
SAVANNAH, GA.
750 ACRES OF LAND
Will be Sal f Cheip to C.'ose up an
Estate.
I will sell cheap 750 acres of valuable
land in Dougneity county. The railroad
from Albany to Arlington rzzz through it.
Tho land is near Wicker's .Station, 12
miles from Albany. The largo part of it
clearedand in cultiva'.ion. Address
WM. UU niKHKOllDj
02t2wtilja
ii r.ni 'me.
Culloden, Ga.
FOR SALE.
17NGINKS, Boilers, Saw Mills.Corn Mills,
ill Cotton PresM-s, Mill Spin lies. Pulleys.
Shaftings, Hangers, etc. All kinds cast
ings,
wnte for p
uar 1 i \
on any kind of machine-
It. 1). COLE ACO.,
Newnan. Ga.
gTIMRD RIO IRAPHIKS
irblipcred the custo
mer..
"You .hall have both. I'll tell you
how It li that politics ms<l« my beard
grow."
'That's what wo want ao kmw." said
tha boss with a p:o"c>>ional Interest In the
now and mystic lotion.
"Then," aa<d the e'esn faced stranger.
■ for twtnly-foar years ns rsxsr hu
touch- d my face. This beard Is the result.
It was in 1800 I wis as spruce ajoil't
cliap at ever kicked np his lie
knew young
They called i
00 Bsrstow in iho»o p.irt ,
. me ‘young Joe* to make a dif-
forence between th# old men and HU. The]
old man wai a Bourbon Democrat ‘0 the
backbone, and I was with him tilt the *p'it
fn the : &X) convention, when the Southern
ers put un John 0. Breckenrldge and we—
the North-nominated Stephen A. Doug
las. I felt strong on the subject and
worked for Doqg as day and night, I
nsed to be very smart fn my appearance fn
those days, but I worked so hard l h id no
time for prinking up.
*‘Oa; Silght I • !|***«h at a meet
ing In the ol i Turnpike tavern. I had a
week’s growth of Htiibbh on my face, and
before I had spoken a dozen words come
1 «it sang out. ‘Go.get a shave.' Everybody
laughed as tb*y in iked at me. r Get a
shave?' says I. 'No razor touches my face
till I see a’Democratic President iu dhc
White House/
And the beardless man started up the
step* with the elan of a boy, followed * r
*h« gang. Last night he was paintl g
JUST
R2ADY.
BLAINE and LOOAN.
712 Royal Oi tivo pigt'-: '•■ full page illustm-
nr.-- TILOEN. CLEVELAND and HIND*
ICK8. 771 Royal octavo pages; £> full p*C*
lustration.
fiffiSWMffuflfWIfc.
U. S. GOODdPEED & CO ,
d rhicagA
A CENTS. srnn<-»hJng new. Rare c.nnnce, to
on-fits free. Write to-day. Empire Go., Sto
1'anal street, N. Y. w ©o w41
Dr. T. D. Crothers describes, in the D
cembcr Popular Science Monthly, a fern
conscious, trance-like state, which some
times follows hard drinking. A person in
this condition may carry on his rcgul
business, or may perform unmual acts <
oven crimes, none of which will be re
membered when he recovers full con-
sciousne-L In regard to the legal treat- . ’on-pf-iT”FKfiE"
meu f o? drunkards. Dr. brothers says: j Ad.ire:
1. "Inebriety in allc.i*^ must be regard-1 pettw^y
1 as a iJisi-}•.<•. and the paii**nt forced to * 1 ream smne>hlng new. Rare chant
use the means for rco -very. # Like the vie- 4 CeNr6 ' *
tim of infectious disease, his personal re
sponsibility is increased, and the commu
nity with him are bound to insist on the
treatment as a necessity.
2 "Inebriety mult be recjcnized as a
condition of legal responsibility to a certain
extent, depending on tbeciraatnstances of
ea 1» individual ease.
3. "All unusual acts or crimes commit
ted by Inebriates, either in a state of par
tial stupor or alleged amnesia (or loss of
memory) which c >mes under legal recogni
tion, fbould rective thorough study by
competent physicians, before tbe Iegu re
sponsibility can be deUrmit e»l.
i "When the Iran •- stste is established,
beyond doubt the person ii both physio
logically and legs ly irresponsible for his
acts daring this period. But each csse
should always he determined from the
facts of iia individual history.
"la the lighjtof science the present le-
.ral treatment of Inebriety in but li tle else
than barbarism. The object of the law
ninlihmont benefits no one and make« TUU „„ , . ... . . . ,
tnM-F.v. 1 11 rho \\ ilburn j.lantation, two and a hob
1 1 f, ' .rab.e d^roving all mUea from Maton. on tiie Clinton rood.
P . of r.-.-.iv. ry iiii-l reform to j 0lw ol tlw bol , j„ Bibb counly.
.1 iu’ 1 :i I 1-1 any fo ;u m ty , 0 tl inn 1, a line d .v.-ding and outhouses, [
for rent to a good tenant on eaiy terms.
Would lease for live years The land lies !
ine on the Ocmulgee river and Walnut creek* I
mort ; , Address 1
J. G.jWILBURN,
1 niunn Send six cents for postage
1 I *1/1 IU and receive frees costly box
4 I III/in of goods which will help off,
il I Lll/J Ut of cither ncx, t< more money
riht away than anything else In thla world.
F-rtnnAS await tho workers r.bsolutelj s^re.
At once a.ldrebS Truk A Co., Augusta, Mato#.
tebSvrly
■GKORtHA, HI HH *
rdieftnll bal applied for en
ally atul setting apart and v
S c cl, and 1 will pa-* uj»oi
o’cltx k a. in. on Thursday,J
at my office.
I’NTY.—Whereas, W. C.
r ex-mpti.m of person-
uid valuation ot home-
ine fttie
Uh, 1884,
J. A. McMANUd,
Ordinary.
fToiTTcl-:s 1-1 w-T -mai.i. k\rm.h wiTff
h ire it 'V.itrttr. - HU-1 th.- -tor.- at Holton. IM-
iti- s' -'anl G-» t<»-*•*«• tlu- farms and
Ai-i-ly to ROUT. i;. 1’AlUC, Macon, Ga.
7d« Wit
FOR RENT.
leg a
for pun-1
be no excuse for crime in
but it is still lei9 au c
i»»m*nt, which destroy
victim and mok.i him
help'ess and hopeless. A vast army of
inebriates hovering along these bord
lands of disease and crime, who are t
known and unrecognized, except '
&:oo
Macon, Ga.
the gang. Last night be was paintl gthe l 'iriJ' : ■ S T
B iwery crlnisoo, to tbe d*light of the dime 1 F . - l i ! -1
■ ... iii'kri I- xj t
Ju Lu
IV. hryau lurpiaintur, jd
Johnson vs. Central R. R. and Banking Co.
Case from Pike. Before K. \V. Ho»*k. Judge
pro hac vice. Amendment. Corporations.
Misnomer.
Blandfobd, J.-\Fhere plaintiff filed a declar
ation against the C. R. it. and Banking Com
pany, and, on demurrer. a*ked l«sve to amend
by adding tho words "of Georgia," U was error
to refuse the amendment. Acts of 1850; 14
Go., 277.
niter the declaration is amended, il may plead
f n abatement, or make any motion which may
be right and proper in the premises. Judg
ment reverted.
j. J. Rogers, Boynton A Hammond tor
plaintiff; John L Hall, F. D. DUtnukc contra.
and vice ven t F.qui-
PERfCiftS BROS.,
DEALERS IN
ALL KINDS 0." MACHINERY
The Largest Dealers in the South.
Lith. PLn:.ig am
Mi;is. Cane niilltj
- pert
. Gaum*,
J Belting
Etc.
■4 1
TRYING THE HIM ANESTHETIC.
A Subtil. 8ubst.no. that Affsotn On'»
on. 8.t of Nnrvaa.
Fhllalelphta Press.
Some remarkable experiment! bare
been made during the past few day, by
Philadelphia surge->;u with the new anaes
thetic, bydrochlorate of cosatne, that has
caused such a sensation among physi
cians. The result ot the use ol the drug,
it le eald, is tn Its favor, and It ii consid
ered superior to chloroform or ether In
moit operations ou the eye. Dr. Colter,
ut Vienna, dlsMrered Iti value toms time
last fall, but the Bnt (ample di.l not
come to this country until a few weeks
ago, aud then only to the arnount ol about
aLhtgralna. The cotalue trot soon cor-
neredn i Ithc-j ;otcd price wi* ( a
pound. Thi r.-la none left now. Within
• year, when there are facilities lor lta
manufacture, li It expected thu- it will
-ell tor about fifty cent! a grain. It i, u-> J
In a 2 per cent solution, ami one grain fe
sufficient for a good many operations,
Tbe plant from which the an.-erthetle,
or more properly speaking, the analgetiac.
Itni lets grown in South America. Bo
tanists c ill it the Coco crythroxylum. It Is
a small shrub that hat
its nams might suggest, with the cocos-1
tree of that species. It is |