The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-04-12

kinville" are not sufficiently definite to
restrain the grantor and the contract is
therefore construed to apply only to the
town of Yadkinville and will be enforced
so as to restrain the grantor from prac-
ticing medicine within the corporate linz
it's of that town.
A judgment non obstante veriddicto is
granted only in cases where the cause OF
action is confessed and the matter re-
lied upon in avoidance is insufficient. 81
n. G.. 215.
STATE VS.. EDWARDS Affirmed
confession made to an officer with
out duress is admissible in evidence. 109
~ c. SIC.
The prisoners, in company with others,
were violating a town ordinance by loud
use of profane language upon the STREETS.
The deceased, a policeman of the town,
who had on policeman's uniform, spoke
to them about their disorderly conduct,
and they cursed him; the deceased then
told one of the prisoners to go with him.
whereupon the deceased was shot at sew
eral times by one or more of the crowd,
and killed. There was evidence of pre-
meditation.
error in refusing to charge the jury that
prisoners were not guilty of murder in
the first degree and that if the jury be-
lieved that the deceased was appointed
to perform police duties only at the depot
then he had no right to arrest prisoners
for ro'etoroHs conduct away from the
depot without a warrant that the acts
of deceased amounted to an assault
uhi oh, hn ha1 rio
TO defend themselves
After the court had refused to instruct
the jury that there is no evidence that
the homicide was committed within the
corporate limits of the town of Concord,
he read from the evidence the testimony
Of a witness and remarked Here is evil
dence that the homicide was committed
within the corporate limits of Concord
and there is other evidence of it to which
I will call your attention" Held not to
be an expression of opinion within the
meaning of Section 413 of the Code but
was merely calling the attention of the
jury to evidence, the existence of which
was denied by the prisoners prayer for
instructions.
There was also no error in the further
instruction of the court that it made
acting in "ial capacity as police
man or whether the homicide was COM
mitted within or without the corporate
limits of the town, if the jury were salts
fed beyond a reasonable doubt that the
prisoners killed the deceased upon pre-
vicusly formed design the jury may find
the prisoners guilty Of murder in the
first degree, even though the jury are
d that the deceased was a pri-
vate citizen.
The court was requested to charge that
'If the jury are in doubt to which of the
prisoners shot the deceased, and have
reasonable doubt as to whether Edwards
or Carr shot him, then the verdict should
be not guilty as to both" This the court
refused to give till it had added, Unless
the jury shall be satisfied beyond a rea-
sonable doubt that there was conspiracy
on the part of the prisoners to kill the
deceased, or that they were aiding or
abetting each other; Held no error.
Statevs. Boyle, 104 N. G. 500, has been
several times overruled by this court.
A motion for a new trial in a criminal
case for newly discovered evidence will
not be entertained in the Supreme court.
State VS.. Starnes, "a n. c. 973; State VS..
Gooch Ibid 9S7; State vs.. Rowe, 9S n. c.
GO.