The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1867-03-21
pttlS o TIE illdA cdUkT
ERRORS AND APPEALS. 4
OCTOBER TERM, 1866.

OCTOBER TERM, 1866.
| Isf.lllITA ~
| ss 2. Reynolds Adfmr, Appeal ,frgm the
3 Nelson, Admir-. Monroe RsaSsf soa GsS!' e
,;s,s sa, s court syssEss y Js.,iss
The first objection taken to the de-
cree Is that the record does n6tishow
that the cause was set down, on the
issue docket Of the court below! for
final hearing. When either party dil
reefs the clerk to set down a cause up-
on the docket for hearing, and the5or1
der for that purpose does not appear
upon the minutes, 1t does not becbulA
q part OF the record. DC 1t Is usual I'd
give the order IN writing, but this il
for the guidance Of the clerk. and IL
not required by the statutes, though
very proper. to be enforced the
court as d rule OF practice. In the
Circuit Court, the law requires all eau
SEES to be entered upon the proper
dockets, and to be called in their
regular order, but the record never
shows the fact that such dockets were
duly made out. These are matters
| pertaining to the routine of business,
and as there is no way known to our
law of calling a cause for trial, except
by means OF the dockets required to
be kept, it must always be presumed,
/ in the absence Of proof to thecontrary,
that the business of the court was pro-
ceeded with ina lawful and orderly
i manner A3aes s2ts2a4 b6oi .aifas
The second point relied on is that
theesse was tried, and final decree
signed, in less than five months after
the answer was fled, without giving
the time allowed by law for taking tes-
tinlony in. support of the answer =
A demurrer to the bill was disaIlow-
ed on the 18th of June, 1859, and leave
given the defendant to file his answer
by the next term Of the Court; the said
answer to be filed as of the term when
the leave was given. Immediately
following the entry of the Judgment on
the demurrer, the record states that
thereupon Che defendant filed his
answer in these words" The date Of
the filing is not otberwise given, and
there is nothing to show that the an
swer was not fled Immediately on the
oYerrufing Of the demurrer, as the
language of the record imparts, except
the jarat, which shows that the answer
was sworn to on the 1916 of December,
1889, This would hardly be sufficient
to overcome the express recital Of the
record as to lifetime of filing, as the
answer might have been sworn to,
afterwards ZOO g - jars sob q
But admitting the answer to have been
actually filed on the day it was sworn
to,-that is, on the 10th Of December,
1859, it does not by any means How
that the final decree, signed ON the
day folio wing, was therefore erroneous
For, the Court ought, and no doubt
would, ON disallowing the demurrer at
the June term, have required the an
swer to be put in within thirty days,
SO that allowing five months to take
testimony, the cause would have
been ready for hearing at the
December term. ~ But as matter
of favor. and convenience to the
defendant he was allowed the entire
vacation of six months in which TO
file his answer and to prevent this
indulgence from working injustice
to the complainant the court imposed
the very proper condition that it
should be fled as of the June term,
that is, that when fled, it should have
the same effect only as if filed at the |
June term. The object of this was
that the five months allowed for taking
testimony should begin to run from |
June term, and that the defendant
should not, ! by delaying to put in his
answer, entitle himself to another con-
tfnuance.l o3 oidRIiE59f 81 81 N5fbla3II
But 1t is amfstake to suppose that a
defendant Is in all cases entitled to five
months after fling his answer, to take
testimony. On the contrary, the COM
plainant may in all cases, set the cause
down for hearing Immediately after the
answer comes in, the only consequence
being that he thereby admits the an
swer to BE-. true. Rev Code, SAT, Art,
49, u That course might have been safe
ly taken in this case, for the answer
does not deny a single allegation of
the bill, but only alledges that the de
PENDANT has no knowledge of any of
the facts stated in the bib, and demands
strict proof $500. ~
1T is lastly insisted that the proof
was not snfficient to sustain the bill, /
but on this point we have come, TO al
conclusion. We think the
evidence was clear and convincing,
and that the decree was correct. Let
it be affirmed, .3'2o ~ s. - -. y
The committee appointed bya the |
Chamber of CONNIE cree in Cincinnati.
to examine the claims of aueotnmittee.
from Cherokee county Alabama, re1
garding the restitution of the people
IN thai. county, reported to the Cham
Der that, about five thoasand people
are wholly, destitute of food, and, re-
that donationsj be madeI
Immediately of money or corprto meet
their necessities The proprietors Of
al the boats running in the Memphis
and New, Orleans trade offer to- carry
donati Ions thus made free of charge toj
= n -