The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1885-11-26
ames D. Beggs, for Appellants.


large or alter the estate devised by will.
Decree reversed
James D. Beggs, for Appellants.
Thomas Jackson ct al, Appellants, vs. James T.
Magbee ct al. ,Appellees Hillsborough county.
MCWHoRTER, c. j.:
/. The reformation of written instruments,
when by mistake they express more or less than
the parties intended, is well established branch
of equity jurisdiction.
Q. If the proof is not full and satisfactory, and
the mistake plain, equity will not interfere for
the writing should be deemed the sole exposition
OF the intent of the parties until the contrary is
established beyond reasonable controversy.
g. When bill for reformation of the calls in
a deed alleges that said deed contains calls for
land which the grantOr intended to convey, as
well as calls for land which he never intended to
convey. plea setting forth that the grantor
was the grantees tenant of part of the land de-
scribed in said deed, and payed rent therefor, is
a bad plea end should be overrued.
a. Where a deed describes the land conveyed,
by well defined metes and bounds, and states
the number of acres contained therein, the more
certain description by boundaries must govern
the construction Of the call and both grantor
and grantee, in the absence of fraud, take the
risk as to the quantity of the land.
Decree reversed and case remanded
Finley d Philips for Appellants; Fl. G. Mac
farlane, Hammond q Johnson, for Appelees.
John B. E. Sloan ct al., Appellants, vs.. Susan
NJ. Sloan ct al, Appellees-Marion county.
RANEY, j.:
l. The statutes OF Florida do not clothe "for.
eign executor" with authority to defend suit
in her courts, nor can such authority be given
by consent of parties that he shall become q
party defendant to a suit pending and an order
therein making such party.
Q. Where defect of necessary parties, which
existed prior to the decree appealed from. Is dis
CO yered on appeal, the decree may be reversed
and the cause remanded with leave to make par
ties, and for further proceedings.
Decree reversed.
A. W. Cockrell & Son, for Appellants; C. P
& ]. c. Cooper, for Appellees.
George Andrews Plaintiff in Error, VS.. The State
of Florida, Defendant In Error-Escambia
county.
RANEY, j.:
1. The State moved for continuance of the
trial upon an indictment for murder, supporting
the motion by a written statement Of the State
Attorney of what the absent witness would tes
tify if present. The prisoner objected to the
continuance on the ground that the witness had
never been before the grand jury, and that the
indictment was found without bis testimony.
The Circuit Judge ruled tnat the continuance
should be granted unless the prisoner should
waive the presence OF the witness and agree that
if present he would testify to the fects set out in
the statement. The prisoner excepted to the
railing, but thereupOn agreed in writing to waive
the presence of the witness, and to admit that
the witness would if present, testify to the facts
stated. The bill of exceptions purports to give
all the testimony used on the trial before the
jury which was afterwards impannelled, but
neither it nor the record shows that such state
ment or agi cement, or the testimony of the wit
ness, was used on such trial. Held: There is
nothing to show that the ruling had any effect
upon the verdict, and il will not be reviewed in
the Supreme Court on a motion FOR a new
trial.
O. A venireman stated on his cosr dire that he
had formed an opinion as to the guilt or limo.
cence of the accused, who was charged with
murder, and that II was not formed from hear
ing or cOnversing with the witnesses in the case
that if he went into the jury box he would give
a verdict according to the evidence; "that 1t
wsuld take reasonable amount of evidence
that it would take conclusive evidence to change
his mind" The Circuit Judge ruled that he
was a competent juror. Held To be error
and that he was not co npetent
g. A venireman stated on his uosr dire that
his opinion was formed from rumor; that he
had never conversed with the witnesses, and his
opinion would yield readily to evidence, but
he would rather not have heard what he had If
he was to 60 in the jury box. The Circuit Judge
ruleu ne was compctent juror ActU: MOI 10
be error.
L. Whether, where avenireman is erreneousy
ruled to be competent as q juror, notwithstaud
ing his opinions are of such character a. In law
disquality him TO sit on the jury, and he Is af-
forwards challenged peremptorily by the prison
er, land the record does not show that his per-
emptory challenges were exhausted before full
jury was sworn, 1t is material error for which
q new trial will be granted. Quers?
8. Where part of q charge to the jury is ex-
cepted to, the whole charge should be consid.
cred, and if the charge considered as a whole is
free from the objection urged, the exception
should be overruled
g. The Circuit Judge charged the jury that
manslaughter In the second and fourth de-
grees only, was to be considered by them
"fnr the reason that under the admission
of the prisoner that he did the killing with de-
sign to protect himself, the others are put out of
consideration" Held To be error, as no such
admission appears in the record.
T. 1t is error to instruct the jury that the state.
ment OF the prisoner of his defence under the
statute is to be received with caution because OF
the position he occupies. The statute gives the
right to make this statement unqualified BY such
comment or caution from the Judge
8. The doctrine Of reasonable doubt does not
apply to proof OF venue. 1.-THE evidence raises
violent presumption that the offence was COM
miited in the county alleged, or It may be rea-
sonably inferred from the evidence, II Ii suffi-
Gent
Judgment reversed and new trial granted.
VIM A. Blount and j. e. Yonge for Plaintiff
10 Error; Attorney. General for Defendant In
Error