Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1880-10-03

An order for the abatement of a writ OF
error will not be made at the second term
after the death of the party has been sug-
gested, proved and entered of record, the
right t. revive continuing during the
whole of the term.-Uooper J.-Crouch VS..
Hopper.
Pension Money-Exemption of.
The exemption OF pen ion money, under
the act of congress from legal seizure con-
tinues until the money is actually paid to
the pensiOner, and therefore formal pay
ment 10 third person, which by reason of
the fraud and collusion between the PEN
sion agent and such person, leaves the
agent liable for the money as still IN his
hands will not deprive the pensionec If
the protection of the act Cooper j. -
Payne& Go avs. Gibson.
Statue of limitations of two years and
six months, by whom may be pleaded.
The statute of limitations tor two years
and six months in favor of personal repre-
sentatives is personal to them, and there
fore a Joint plea By the administrators of q
Auardian and the surety of the guardian on
his official bond to bill filed against them
on q decree against the guardian and surety
for the official delinquency of the former,
is bad as to the surety. And such plea
! filed to a cross bill in which it is stated that
q scire facias to revive the decree had been
| sued out and served within the two years
! and six months, and was then depending,
is bad as to both defendants.-Davis VS..
Davis.-Cooper, j.
Chancery court viii rectify contract,
when.
l. A court of chancery will, if justice re,
quires, rectify cont, act for sale OF land
AID execute it as corrected. kelly vs.
! Mckinney Cooper, j,
/ Practice-Rehearlng, granted whom.
! 2. A rehearlng IN equity for the purpose
of eceving new evidence should only bt
granted upon good cause shown, to let ii
material or controlling evidence newly
dIscopered, and which could not have
been sooner brought for ward by reasonable
diligence. Idem.
Same-same.
3. 1t is no ground for o rehearing tina
the proof of the oppOst9 party, as the
petitioner is advised, had undue weight OF
the hearing which was u surprise to him
nor that the petitioners own deposition
had not been taken, no excuse being
given for the failure to have his testimony
a. the hearing, nor that the petitioner ha
recently discovered evidence which Nigh
have been previously ascertained b.
reasonable diligence or which was merely
cumulative 1dem.
Attac oment-Order for when sufficient.
L.
general, and need not ntain all the re-
Citals prescribed for the notice By publica'
ton. Howard VS.. Jenkins.
2. Decree Rec tails in, conclusive when.
The recitaIs In an order taking a bill fo
confessed that publication has been regu
larly m 4de is sufficient to sustain attach
meut proceedings against collateral attack
or even from a direct ATTACK by appeal il
the absence of anything in the RECORD
showing that the recital was erroneous
Idem.
8. Observation-Disclosures
TIE n otice of publication, under the code
235z2, is not required by that section t
show that the attachment was levied
Idem.
| Dower-Hom omestead-Rlght OF, how con
veyed.
A conveyance of land to o trustee TO Sc
cure debt of the husband, made by thu
husband and wife, with the privy exsmina
tim of the wife, whereby they do bar
gain, sell and convey" to the trustee in te
the land, describing it, will pass both th'
homestead and dover estates of the wife il
the ls I'D, Coop r. j. Daily VS.. Willis.
Railroad-noL liable for accident, when.
1 A railroad company failing to comply
with all the precautions tine statute Il
not liable in amsges for an injury re
sulting to person or animal upon th
track, if it be shown that compliance wa
| i'm possl BILE after the injured party coult
have been disco oIered.-Cooper ", 1
| G.. 4. Ii. Co VS.. Swaney.
Indictment for selling lIquor-evidence.
!. Upon the trial of an indictment tor sell
ing intox Icating beverage within four mi C
of an Incorporated institution of learriL &
Wnere the defense is that the sale was mad
by Ii enseded. druggist to fill the prescrip
tlUn Of q physician, proof other sales tha
the one for which the defendant is on trial
is admissible to show the intent with whic
the sale was made.-Cooper J.-Dobson VI
State.
S4me-same.
z Upon such a trial, it is not error
sustain an objection by the state TO pare
proof of the quantity of liquor called 70
by written prescription, nor to overrul
an objection of the defendant TO ora
evidence OF the persan for whom the pre-
scrlpLlon was made. ldem.
Charge of court-what may cover.
3. lt is proper t. charge the Jaw upol
any state Of f. CTS raised by the evidenc
and pertinent to the issues, although the
evIden 9 may be slight, if sufficient t
sustain verdict. 1dem.
Charge-Wheo need rot be written.
4. 1t is not ror iOr the judge, in a erin
inal prosecution tor a misuemeanor. to re
IdS0a upon Tue request VI tuo o0l0HudnL y
deliver written charge to the jury. Idem
Statement by judge to jury in absence @
counsel and prisoner.
B. Nor was 1t error, in such case to stat
to the july in the absence of the prisone
and his counsel, af.er an effort to procur
the attendance IF the counsel, the maxi
mum and minimum Of the fine imposed b,
law for the particular otfence, and that
was their duty to assess it within thos
limits, if they found hin guilty, there benz
no exception TO the correctness Of the state
ment. 1dem.
Evidence in suit for damages--what com
petent
/. La an action for damages against
railway company, brought by party fo
injury sustained, it is competent to thoV
the plaintiffs ability and capacity for Labor
as we'll as skill in any particular art OF
profession in order to show what ne wa:
capable of earning; but it is not error t.
reject question which simply calls 70
the amount of money which plaintiff mad
=. the previous year, Mcfarland, j. Rail
Road vs.. White.
Railroad-person on look out' must see
z, To comply with the statute the person
on the look out on q railroad train mus
be in such position as to enable him to Sc
ahead and must b3 watchful; but i
| in such position and the object on the trsc
was visible and yet not seen, the iur,
would be warranted in finding that tn
person was not vigilant.-ldem.
Practice Observation-Disclosures
A bill brought by a number of parties t
have the sureIies of d. dlfaultiLg clerk &C