The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-06-15

4
| From Arson. No error
An indictment under The Code section
966 charged that defendant entered
stcrc house where there was money, dry
goods, etc. lin the night time and with
intent unlawfully wllfully and feloniously
to commit the crime of larceny etc;
Held that the motion in Arrest of judg-
mont upon the ground that the intent to
commit the crime of larceny was not
sufficiently charged, was properly denied.
State VS.. Christmas, 1O1 N. c. 755.
STATE VS.. COATS, appellant. From
| Madison No error.
Where an indictment is found upon tes-
timony all of which is incompetent, or
| OF witnesses all of whom were disquali-
fed the bill will be quashed. But when
some of the testimony or some of the wit
| nesses before the grand jury were incom-
potent the court will not inquire how far
the same contributed to the finding of the
bill, but will admit the competent testi-
rlony upon thc trial before the petit
jury, and in the case the accused is con-
vctcd the judgment will not be arrest
ed.
HARRIS VS.. WOODARD, appellant From
Granville. No error.
Description in a decd: "a certain piece
CO land grlst mill and fixtures, ana one
store house, lying and being in Brassfield
township, Granville county, n. c., and
adjoining tho lands of manning several
rartics) said lot to contain three acres.
There are forty acres in the tract. The
description was held to be defective, as
there was nothing to segregate the three
acres out of the forty-no beginning, dis
tanccs, etc. Tho rule is that a deed
must set forth subject matter, either
certain in itself or capable of being re-
duced to a certainty by a recurrence to
something to which the deed refers. "a
N c. no
The Act CT 1891, chapter ASS. applies only
wherc there is a description which can
be aided by parol, but not Gas here)
where there is no description.
FULLER, appellant, VS.. JENKINS. From
Swain. Reversed.
Action to have decd declared a mort
gage to secure a loan of $50. The jury
found upon tho issues that it was agreed
between the parties that defendant should
hold tho deed as security for said amount:
that the clause of redemption was not
omitted by reason of ignorance, fraud,
etc., and that defendant owed 'plaintifT
$50 for rent. The only question raised
by the appeal is as to tho judgment
CpCn tho verdict; and the court hold
that it should have been rendered for
plaintiff upon payment of the loan of
$50 with interest after doducting tho rent
found to be due the PLAINTIFF; and that
defendant should rCconvey; and, in default
of payment by plaintiff of the balance
due, there should he foreclosure
PERRY VS., COMMISSIONERS OF CHAT
HAM. appellants. No error
The commissioners, upon petition of
majority of land owners residing in any
part or territory of the county of Chat
ham arc directed by the Act Of 1901
charter 531 to establish the stock law
in such territory, to take effect at such
tir0o as may be designated in such pc
titicn. 1t was admitted that the petition
was signed by majority Of the land
owners in tho particular territory. but the
commissioners refused the same because
in part Of said territory. the stock law
had already been established and with
out tho signature of the land owners in
the latter territory. the petition was not
signed by majority Held that the rea-
son is invalid under Smalley vs.. Commits
no error in adjudging that a percmptory
mandamus issue.
STATE VS.. MONDS. appellant. From
Chowan. New trial.
On trial of an indictment for rape of
female over ten and under fourteen
years of age, under section 1101 of The
Code as amended by the Act OF 1895, chap
ter 395, the court charged among other
things that if the jury find that defendant
injured and abused the genital organs
Of the female he would be guilty; Hold
error. The abusing is no part Of the
common or statute law definition of The
offence but the gravamcn of the offence
is penetration.
STATE VS.. SUMNER, appellant. From
Macon. Now trial
Murder trial: The rule under which
tho character of deceased is admissible
is to show that the prisoner had reason
20 apprchcnd violence, which apprehen-
sion would be excited by the particular
conditions under which the deceased was
rcputcd to be dangerous or violent. State
VS.. Turpin, n n. G. ALB State VS.. McIver
125 N. c. 645
in this case the prisoner testified that
he had been told by everybody about
deccaseds character as a dangerous man
and had been warned that he would walk
up and ask n man for his right hand
and stick a knife in him with his left
hand" and upon the occasion OF the homi-
eide the prisoner further testified that
the deceased said to him "Wcll, give me
your hand; Held that the exclusion of
this evidence entitled the prisoner to a
new trial
STATE VS.. HICKS, appellant. From
Vance. No error.
On trial of an Indictment for murder it
is not error to refuse a charge, however
correct in law, when there is no evil
dCnce to support it. State VS.. McDuffie
107 N. SS5. A broadside exception will
not be entertained The trial judge is not
required to give instructions in the very
word of the prayer. The instructions here
were fairly given and there is no error
in tho record
STATE VS.. THOMPSON ct al, appellants
From Montgomery. Error.
Indictment for forcible trespass or for
chile entry and detainer: It appeared
that the prosecutrix and the accused both
claimed title 20 the land, and where it is
developed that it is a case of diSDutpd