Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1877-11-17
SUPREME COURT.
Abstract Of Opinions Delivered on
saturday Last.
Knoxville Chronicle. 11th.l
BY JUDGE sNEED.

hhDA SnAeAASA1aA AtAsl
BY JUDGE sNEED.
Lea VS.. the State: Horse-stealing is an
indictable o%tfense, Notwithstanding the
act of 1875.
Arrowood vs.. the State: A witness for
the State cannot, in default of bond, be
imprisoned on an apprehension or suspi.
cion that he will be guilty of contempt
Of court by willful absence. The courts
have authority to imprison only for con-
tempt committed, and then only for such
coutempts as are specified in the statute.
Freeman j. dissents, holding that on
proper showing OF apprehended absence,
the Circuit and Criminal Courts may re-
quire bond OF a witness, and in default,
may commit him till the trial, or so long
as the cause of apprehension continues.
Rollins vs.. Young: No appeal lies
from the judgment in a case Of habeas
corpus.
Riley vs.. Frost: In q case tried by the
Circuit Judge and appealed in error to
this court, a re~mandment will not be or.
dered, but final judgment will be pro.
nounced.
Chandler VS.. the State: The jury found
the prisoner guilty Of felony but fixed no
time Of imprisonment. Held that judg.
ment would not be arrested but new trial
awarded.
Bachman vs.. Roller: par bank
notes" is a legal term and parol evi.
dencs is inadmissible to show that it has
other than the legal meaning.
1t is not error for the court to refuse
TO charge that the plea Of the statute Of
limitation is an honest defence.
A new promise to revive an old debt
must be made to the creditor or his agent.
Proof of such a promise made to third
parties is insdmissible.
Though there is evidence sufficient in
the opinion of the court TO sustain the
verdict, yet the admission of illegal ma
terial proof is reversible error.
Beck VS.. Hamilton County: The gen.
eral statute in the code is sufficient to
authorize the County Court to provide
for the TRANSFERRING aud preservation OF
the public records in all cases where they
are in danger Of becoming illegible from
use.
No ratification Of record by the County
Court is necessary to validate the acts OF
the agents Of the county, who may con.
tract by parol within the scope Of their
authority.
BY JUDGE DEADEMCK.
Payne VS.. the State: The putting Of
a question to a witness by the Court is
not Of itself reversible error, especially
when, On objection Of counsel it is with.
drawn, and no answer required.
1t is error to reject o witness merely
for violation Of the rule Of exclusion
from the courthouse; but if after such
rejection, the prisoner is allowed the
privilege of examing him, it is moi
ground for reversal.
1t is not required that the Judge, il
felony cases, shall read his own charge
to the jury; he may direct the reading L
be done by another. And so it is a sufi
Gent compliance with the statutes il tn
= judge pass to the jury, with instruction
to consider same, the written proposition
Of prisoners counsel, previously read il
the hearing of the jury.
Fortner vs.. the State: l. is error I,
exclude evidence Of hereditary tendenc,
to insanity.
Steele vs.. the State: In an indictmen
for false pretense, evidence that tn
prisoner presented a second draft, no
r due him, is admissible 10 show the fac
t Of guilty knowledge.
, Maloney VS.. Wilson: The administrs
tor Of the debtor, requested in writing @
> a nonresident creditor a delay Of tire
9 years: it was granted, and al the expirs
e ton Of the time, when sued, the admin
i~strator pleaded the statute of six years
and it was not allowed. Held: Tha
! this was error.
Hunter & Brubaker VS.. Smith: Con
~plainants names appeared upon a bon
as sureties for the defendant in an al
: peal to the Circuit Court. Responder
who was the plaintiff at law, had q rul
upon the defendant to give q new bon
t upon the ground that the sureties' name
9 were forged; the rule was made absolut