The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-09-02

| would ripen into a title If sufficiently maintained as to time and character but Is such possession as amounts to | disputed or scrambling possession. as ontra-distinguished from peaceable and quiet possession.
 2. Same; evidence to establish Where the defendant claimed by ad- verse possession and the evidence tend ed to show that he was in actual pos session of the land under a deed. and that for number of years he had cul- tivated part of the land personally and by tenant, and that after the house thereon and the fence enclosing the land had been destroyed he continued his acts of ownership such as taking timber. etc. from the land, paying taxes thereon, and otherwise claiming the land. and that shortly before the filing of the bill he notified the agent of complainant that the land was his. such evidence was sufficient to show an actual and disputed possession suf- ficient to defeat the bill. although cona- plainant had the legal title to the land and constructive possession through such title
 Appeal from DeKalb Chancery Court
 Heard before Hon. W. H. Simpson.
 Reversed and rendered. Opinion by Dowdell, !.
 Tyson. c. J.. Anderson and McClel- Ian, JJ.. concur
 BRoADUS COTTON MILLS V. ALSToN
 & GAMBLE.
 Assumpsit. Decided April Is, 1908.
 46 South 250.)
 Bills of exceptions; time of signing; extension--On August 27, 1907, the court grapted SO days from the ad- journmenf of the court within which to have a bill of exceptions signed. On the a20th of November. the judge sign ed an order extending the time for said signing. It does not appear when the court adjourned, or that the second order was made within the 60 days after the adjournment of the court, or before expiration of the time previously given. Held, as 1t cannot be presumed that the court continued in session until September 20, the lat ter order was void and the bill of exceptions were not signed within the time allowed.
 Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court.
 Heard before Hon. W. w. Haralson. Affirmed. Opinion by. Anderson J.
 Tyson. C. T, Dowdell and Simpson, JJ.. concur.
 LARKIN V. SIMMONS.
 Assumpsit. Decided April 23, 1908.
 1. Courts; county courts: establish ment-The county court is creation of the statute and may be abolished by the legislature,
 2. Statute; local acts: passage: mo- tice-The provisions of sec. 106 Consti- tuition 1901, are mandatory and must be complied with to render local act valid
 3. Courts; circuit courts; jurisdict- ion; constitutional provision-The ju- | risdiction of the circuit court in civil and criminal cases is limited by sect ions and 143, constitution 1901. and an act seeking to confer Jurisdiction in matters contrary to or outside the | limits prescribed in those sections, is unconstitutional and void. {. Statutes: local acts; passage; mo- | tice-The notice of the intention to ap- ply for the passage of the act of Aug ust 1, 1907, which repeals the acts of 1900 and 1903, relating to the same | subject matter recited that it would provide for the transfer of all actions and proceedings-a all indictments in the county courts, and invest the cir cult court with Jurisdiction to try such | cases. To act of August 1. 1907. pro- | vided that all cases on the docket of | county court of which the circuit court had no original Jurisdiction. should be certified to the circuit court i and such cases should be disposed of as appeal cases from justices of the peace. Held, that whether the notice | be contrued to embrace only the trans- | fer of actions which might have been originally commenced in the circuit court, and cases appealed from jus- tice courts. or whether it meant that cases pending in the county court commenced originally there and of which the circuit court had not the original jurisdiction, would be trans | ferred to the circuit court, in either event. the notice was insufficient to au- | thorize the passage of said act of August 1. 1907, and consequently said | act is void, said matter being of the | essence of the act.
 Appeal from Coffee County Court | Heard before Hon. H. H. Blackman. l Affirmed Opinion by Denson, ].
 Tyson, c. J., Haralson and Simpson, l JJ., concur.