Arizona weekly republican., 1893-01-19
Tor the Guidance of the
 Supreme Court
In the Matter of Assign
 ments of Error.
An Important Time-SaVing Ap-
 pIiance Also Adopted
posoIutions of Respect In the Matter of the Late Chief Justice
 John c. Shields.

Forr important rules were passed in ,rpreme court yesterday which will be oiyrfst interest to the bar and which ,suIs two questions of practice con- corning which practitioners have been 5irIdrd and have employed methods oppnrabr to the apparent needs of the cs,r Iu uand. The first three rules relate to the assignment of errors con esrpIng which the bar has occupied a considerable part ot two days in discus sion and are as follows:
 Rglgl The assignment of errors must dis. tBc.y specify each ground of error relied Ig Dc distinct the assignment must state the DaruC ag fling complained Ol; II the par f1B.trrIlUg complained Ol ha' been em bodied nam .usu for uew trlal with other rulings, insuy U.urr motion, in d bill of exceptions, m a.tt.ugNt Oi facts, or otherwise in the record, fmu-t nevertheless be Set forth lu the assign waived iuuyerruiug e motion for q new trial, where tb4 mlIlu Is based upon more than one ground wIIu.t be considered as distinct and specific. bgEluul4lura Co such ASsisnm mt eal h ground if, ou the motion relied upon as error in hs court must be separately and distinctly inc purpose of the assignment of errors in he dr,. instance iS tO apprise the appellee Ot he par lcular specific rulings of the trial court 0fWHigh Jue appellant complains, and secondly ,oeal lhe a tenJiOn of this court thereto.
 Any objection Co any ruling or action of the co.r. b low will be deemed waived here, un- les, it shall have been assigned as error in the manner above provided.
 NO amendment of an assignment of errors . ls A. 1. R1 hy n A b. affiayl. of eNgusa1 ole neg let,
 No assignment of errors will be allowed in thisuD lgt when none were filed in the district c0lg. nor an additional assignment of errors except hy cOuseu Ot the parties here
 Rulrl In ass guing th error in the giving OilI ruclJus tJ the JIry Jy the lower court, the appellant nut state whether the tnstruC- ton complained of is CT OgeOus in its state mtlt Oi ne law applicable 10 any state of fact, O- Ina it is au erroneous application of iLs law 10 the particular facts of the case ap- ps8sl, ting orlcly the facts Co which it was tPn cd.
 pr5pD luOu Oi ,4w, or contains a llmitA ion Of "A gene al prDgOsiton tue as ignmeLt shall dh.nf,.y specify what proposition or limita- tol is complained Of
 II the refusal Co give an instruction asked for by Che appellant in the court below be as GWedaS error, the assignment must state the BpDHrlD .Iiy Oi such instruction tU the fact of Che ease
 Ruls &-This court will deem as waived all su0r, not argued in his brief by the psrty as signing them.
 The following rule was also adopted. In order of argument in eases on appeal or wi. OI error In this court the time OvCI pied sbA ne limited Co one nOlr on each side un less upon wrlteu motion previously filed wtl Ias clerk and presented Co the court sufl- Celf cause be shown for an extension Of time. The order Ot the argument shall be unless otherwise ordered, three quarters of an hour .o appellant Ur plaintiff in error in which tO open. one hour Co appellee to answer and one qlarter Of an hour to appellant for reply
 The arguments in the case of the Wateryal Mining company vs c. w. Leach and E. B. Gage were concluded and the case was submitted. Unim- pOrlant action was taken in a half dozen other cases.
 Judge W. W. Parker in behalf of the committee previously appointed to draft resolutions of respect in the matter of the death of John C. Shields, late chief justice Of the territory submitted a re- port which was ordered to be placed on record.