The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-11-30
Digest of Opinions.

State V. c. r. Ridge. Indictment for
forgery. The defendant excepted be-
cause the Indictment charged the for
gerry of "a certain instrument in writ
ing.' whereas the instrument was partly
printed and partly written. The court
holds that it is the signature which gives
the paper the character of a forgery.
State V. Jones, ] Mcmillan Is. CD, 236.
State V. G. W. Chaffin. This was an
Indictment for a tenant for removing
an clubhouse after the expiration of ten
ancy. 1t was agreed that there was no
evidence of tenancy, but the. judge re-
fused TO so charge, though requested.
New trial
------
Laura s. Burns, adm'x, appellant, Y.
Asheboro and Montgomery Railroad Co.
Here the court below ruled ont testimony
for plaintiff going to show what were
the usual monthly earnings of an engi-
neer on railroad, a capacity in which
plaintiffs deceased husband had formerly
served, but permitted defendant to state
what sum he paid engineers on his road.
The court finds an error in this ruling.
New trial
State V. Archie McIver appellant An
appeal on conviction for murder in the
first degree. The court below ruled
oue evidence tending to show that de-
ceased was of violent temper and had ex-
hibited Al violent and vicious temper to-
ward another on the morning of the
homicide. Defendant excepted and the
court sustains the exception. New trial.
-
State V. W. X. Beacham, appellant.
Action to test the validity of a town or
dilance forbidding the keeping Of hogs
i'm the town limits of Laurinburg. The
court below held that such an ordinance
passed by the town commissioners was
valid The finding is not sustained, and
1t is held that under the law only the
board of health can pass such ordinances.
Smitherman Cotton Mills V. Randle-
Manufacturing Company, appellant. On
January q, 1898, the plaintiff contracted
tc furnish a certain quantity of yarn of
Il certain kind to defendant at stated
periods for one year. The contract
stated land with the privilege of renew
ing for three years." Plaintiff contin-
ued to ship yarn until March, 1899, when
deIPu1tdHl gave llpllce ltidt ~ usntcu
Plaintiffs right to renew the contract
that the contract is bilateral and might
be renewed at the will of either party to
ii.
w. j. Bradford appellant, V. Joel
Read. Here plaintiff bought tract of
land from defendant IN 1888 for $500.
giving FIVE notes of $500 each, payable
in /. 2, 3, 4 and 5 years respectively.
Notes were all written on one sheet of
paper Payments were made from time
to time up TO 1897 and were endorsed on
back of the sheet of paper without dlrec-
tons from plaintiff as to which note
payments should apply. Held that pay
ments were as applicable to one note as
another and that statute of limitations
does not apply.
Sarah A. Burney ct al. V. Edna Allen
ct al. This was a contest as 10 the
will of Henry Allen. In the court below
his honor instructed the jury that the
deceased Allen must ACTUALLY have seen,
or have been in position ITO see not
only the witnesses, but the paper writing
itself at the time witnesses signed the
same, and that if the jury should believe
that he did not see the paper writing
at the time witnesses signed it, they
should answer that it was not his last
will and testament" To this defendant
excepted. The court finds no error.