The Weekly Tallahasseean., 1901-12-13
H1ADNOTES TO DECISIONS.
January Term, 1901.

Wal bee Ruis and John Davis, plain
tiffs il error, VS.. the State of Florida,
defend Int in error, Baker county.
Mabry j.:
The purpose of section 24O3 Revised
StatutkS is to punish assaults made
with Intent to commit substantive
crime HDf felony and this intent is the
gist Oh the offence of assaulting anO
ther u tn design to commit the felony,
and tie Indictment or information
should charge the intent with which
the a&sault was made with that GER
taintyS required as to other material
allegat ions. A mere statement of such
intent FIN the conclusion of the indict
ment r information, by way of legal
deduct On or inference from facts pre-
viouslk alleged will not be sufficient.
Judgnkent reversed. B. H. Palmer for
plaints ifs in error; William B. Lamar,
attOrna y-generaI, for the State.
The kdore T. EdgertOn, plaintiff in
error, US. T. II. West and frankie K.
West, defendants in error, Clay cOun-
ty. n Pbry, j.:
1. URder plea of payment evidence
may u given of payment in money, or
in anS other mode agreed upon by the
partie5, provided it is an executed
transsk .ion; and in case of payment
id gO4ls and chattles there be delivery
by thk debtor and acceptance Dy the
credit so as to pass title and be ac-
cepted in discharge of the debt
2. Evidence of payment in chattles
other han money was offered under a
plea payment and was ruled out on
the objection that one of the plaintiffs
was married woman and was not
bounR by payment in any property
other khan cash money; it did not ap-
pear f&Om the pleadings in the case, or
Other% Use, that the designated plaintln
was a married woman: Held, that the
ruling was erroneous on the objection
made& Judgment reversed. P. G.
Fishea and D. U. Fletcher, for plaintiff
in err pr; H. H. Buckman, TO: 'Nfend-
ants error.
william Mitchell and Anthony Minis,
plaint IFS in error, VS.. the State of
Florida, defendant in error, Duval
COUNTY Mabry, J.:
1. assignments of error not argued
in th case are considered, under the
settles rule of this court, abandoned.
2. elther brother nor sister is in
cludeI among the domestic relations
enumk rated in the second division, sec
ton B78, Revised Statutes as origin
ally evised, in defence of whom life
may taken not merely when an ac-
tual ecesSity to kill to prevent fel-
Ony Eists, but when there shall be
reasonable ground to apprehenI a de-
sign u commit a felony, or to do some
great personal injury, and ther3 shall
be iT4minent danger of SUCH design
beingt ANY person :fl;Iy
take he life of another to prevent him
from committing a known fOrcible
felOnN on another, and brother is not
eXclul ed from the right to slay to
prevek t such felony upon his sister,
but bis right under the statute re-
ferref to rests upon the necessity to
kill d prevent the felony.
8. Roof of good character in a GRIM
inal Prosecution does not as matter of
law Mise a reasonable doubt of guilt,
but 81 ch testimony is to be considered
by tn jury like other evidence offered
in thf case.
| 4. where the witnesses offered by the
Stateaand the accused respectively are
about equal in number, and apparent
credi ility, and those for the State are
in di Pct conflict with those for ;be de-
fenceH the question of conflict is eX-
clusi bly, for the jury to settle. Judg-
menta affirmed. Geo. U. Walker, for
plain ifs in error; William B. Lamar,
attOrk Fey general, for the State
VIII lam C. Herring, appellant, VS..
Willis Sm R. Fits, Louisa Fits and the
VOlu& ia County Bank, a corporation
eXistA Ag under the laws of Florida, ap-
pelIe$. Mabry, J.:
l. z court of chanceTy possesses
juris 4ction to correct a mutual mis-
take when clearly established by
prooS
2. When a married woman intends
to o&vey or mortgage her real estate,
and accomplish such purpose exc
cutessa proper instrument in cOnjunc-
tiOn fTith her husband with all the
formHit required bv law but by