The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1891-07-04


must be shown between the publication
complained of and the publication offered
in evidence, and if the subsequent publi-
cation tends to show i'll will towards the
person concerning whom the publication
complained Of is made, and is of such a
nature as to indicate persistent DISPOSE
tion of hatred or i'll will towards him. or
if it indicates part Of settled purpose to
bring him into public hatred, contempt
or rid!cule, and is sufficiently near in
time to afford natural inference that the
same state of mind existed when the pub
lication complained of was made, it is ad-
missile.
8. A witness cannot be ross-exam:ned
as to any fact which is collateral or irrel
evant to the issue merely for the purpose
of contradicting him by other evidence if
he should deny it, thereby to discredit
his testimony.
4. The motives, interest or animus Of
| a witness are not collateral matters, and
these may be shown and considered by
the jury in estimating the cred,bility Of
a witness, and as to such matters he may
be contradicted.
| 5. 1t is Competent to show as a fact
feelings of hostility on the part of a wit
ness, or the state of witness mind, in
respect to the person against whom he
testifies, and the jury may consider this
hostility or bias in estimating his testi-
mony; but an inquiry into the conduct
and acts of parties producing hostil-
ity not relating to the matters in issue
should not be permitted
6. The use of opium cannot be intro
duced to impair the credit of a witness
unless it be shown that the witness was
under the influence of it when examined,
or when the litigated event occurred, or
that his mind was impaired generally by
the use of it.
:. The language of a charge "that the
jury cannot infer that the libel was pub.
lished with good motives; that good mo-
tives must be proved the same as any
other fact, and if the defendant has
failed by competent evidence to prove
that the libel was published with good
motives, they must reject all evidence
going to prove the truth Of the libel and
convict the defendant is calculated to
mislead the Jury into the belief that they
f are never authorized 70 infer good motives
from the facts and circumstances giveI
in evidence in case.
Judgment reversed.
B. NJ. Miller for plaintiff in error; Will
: liam B. Lamar, attorney-general, }. ID
Beggs. state attorney, and Alex. st. Clair
Abrams, for the state.
ID. S. Forbes, appellant, VS.. The Boare
oI of Health of Escambia County, ap-
pellee-Escambia county.
2 MABRY j.:
I. It is a we'll settled rule that when
repeating act re- enaCts substantially th'
, provisions Of the act repealed, the latte
g is construed not to be thereby destroye'
or interrupted in it's operation.
2. The 9th section Of the act OF 1883
chapter 1850, Laws of Florida, repeale
: the act of 1885, chapter 1908, Laws
r Florida, but along with the repeating &c
= ton, and taking effect at the same time
the legislature re enacted substantial
the provisions of the act Of 1885, provld
: ing for the creation of county boards
s health and constituting them corpora
tions: Held, That the act of 1889 mus
s be construed as an amendment OF the &C
of 1885, creating county boards OF healtn
{, and the boards created under the latte
% act are continued in existence with sue
II notifications as are contained IN tn
% former act.
Motion to dismiss denied.
e John G. Avery for the motion; Il
Campbell and P. W. White contra.
J. Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railwa
,r Company, Appellant, VS.. Mltroy Nel
Appellee-Clay county.
- MABRY, j.:
~ |. The instructions Of the court to Il
Jury must be confined to the issues ma'
on the pleadines.
~ Where the record shows that the Ju
was sworn to try the issues joined betwef
the parties it Is sufficient.
8. An objection made for the hrst TN
d. in the appellate court to the manner !,
IT. which the jury was sworn comes too Ia
- to avail the party raising the objection
~ judgment reversed:
ly ]. Parrott and Fletcher & Wufts, I
co appellant; Walker & L'Enge, for app