Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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 |