The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1885-04-15

7s-erfea for The CLARION, ~ \. II. Parker
SltarEeg- LaV. 1askaoa, u ss-
ocloDer Terasa 1881.
NJ AlBaEcnr Er Al J

oetober resEsa -18s4.
}g. ALBaEcGr TAI
EHE SgkEE.
.3n gae Circuit Cours If Kinds couH
t., Ist District. I-J. Wharton Judge,
So aa HT tss. GrigHr'
} " liceass as ee5ois.es - ISSUANCE
security f5r costs .SpseiI' 5iI.s of creep
sI23s. Rec7r3 IF criminal correction as
.rideacs az ctgiJ s3it.
ARNOLD, J.:
Appellant aad the sareJies ou his bond I
Is liquor seller appeal from a Judgment 7.
against them for breaches of the Uond
On tile trial. the court held that a former
criminal conviction against Aibrecht-
en- q plea Of guilty, for the offences de-
ciared upon a. breaches IN the civil SUIT,
was conclusive against him anu his
sureties, and instructed the jury 10 End
for the STATE.
The memorandum record Of liquor
licenses Kept by the sheriff, and the tes
timouy IN regard 10 the entries therein,
were admissible. The entries were made
in the discharge of Official duty, on the
date of the transactions, and the book
was competent original evidence. 1
GrseuL IL. ll5 lI6.
The motion TO require the informer
Chandler To give security for costs was
properly overruled. The action was in
She name Of the state, and the DISPOSE
tion to be made of the penalty recovered,
and other circumstances. dIA not change
the parties Code . 2366.
The record does not show that the
court erred in refusing to arrest the
+ progress of the trial for The examination
or preparation Of special bills OF eNcep-
+ tiuns such bills, signed after the eX-
piratiOn of the term, without agreement,
/ would be utilities. Ii a special bill
stating the facts correctly l. rendered
during trial, it should be signed ut once
I but if found To be incorrect, or if the
/ preparation of a bill would produce
such delay is 90 seriously obStruct the
administration of justice. the exception
should he noted, and reduced To form
afterwards.
The court erred in holding that the
criminal record was conclusive "a ar
estoppel against Albrecht and his sure
ties As a general rule, verdict ant
Judgment in a criminal cease, though
= admissible TO establish tine fact Of th'
rendition OF the judgment, cannot b'
given in evidence, in a civil action, L
, show the truth OF the facts on which
was rendered. 4 person convicted o
any offence is not estopped by the con
, yictiou from disputing in civil SUI
/ the facts upon which 1t Is based, becaus
his adversary in the civil suit WOult
. not have been barred by an acquittal
But q recore of conviction in a crimna
! case, upon plea 81 qaUty, Is Admissible
= in a civil action rs an admission of thu
E fact. II the conviction hsRd been upol
+, plea of not guilty, the record would no
e be admissible. The admission bcin
. made in 4 court does not deprive tn
party os the right TO show the circum
stances under which it was made. 1t
essential even to a judicial cOnfessiO
that it should be made voluntarily an
with full knowledge of its nature an
!. consequences. The conviction of \
+ brecht being upon plea of gritty, tn
. record was admissible, but only rs prta
+ f7eie evidence against him and his sur,
= Ties IJebbsr Tie State 1 Coldwell, l9'
+ Rersrsei
e J. A. Brown, u. Shelton, Calhoon
K Green, for appellants.
IS L. Brame, II. IL. Parker, for appellee
Ell JENNIE L. STEWART,
$ V.
II H. H. BROOKS.
From the Chancery Court Of NoXub,
- County. F. A. Critz, Chancellor.
3 Bill to eai0ia execution Of jpdgmeHt ma
il sh0,r ralid dgeace To clajpA
81 COOPER, J.;
y Brooks fled a bill to enioin the ex
= cution of a Judgment against him. allie
:, ing that the judgment was renderC
> without notice to him. This appeal
" taken from Il decree cancelling the jud
meut.
q There is no allegation in the bill tn
: the notes upon which the judgment
= law was founded have been paid, n
:, are any facts stated from which 1t a
- pears that any other result won
;, follow than a judgment in favor of d
= appellants if q new trial is had at la
- In the absence Of such statements, |
so weight of authority is that a court
~ equity Will not cancel the judgment
law, even though it was rendered wit
q out notice to the defendant. One W
- seeks the the Intervention of a court
:, equity to enjoin the execution Of
T. Judgment at law must show not on
- the existence of those defects viii
- warrant such Intervention, but also til
:, there is valid defence to the claim
- -, which the. judgment is founded. Dec
- rerersea anu bill dismissed
r. Jarnagin x Boyle, L. Brame, for {
ne pellants.
A. Orr & Sims for appellee.