Pine Bluff daily graphic., 1912-03-17

have baen admitted. Also, that ill- Stfuctlons relating to that s,ate CI facts should not have been given.
 As 70 the admission of this testi- mony it is sufficient to say that il was competent as q paIf of the res gesbae; that everything which oc- cured at the time and place of the aCnal killing and was directly cou- nected with it, no matter by whom done or said, is competent. This is we'll settled law.
 Now, as to the form of .he indict- ment
 Our statute abolishes the common law distinction between principals in ,he firs4 and second degrees in these words:
 "All persons being present aiding and abetting, or ready and consenting to aid and abet, in any felony, shall be deemed principal offenders and in- dicted and punished as sueh.'
 kirby's Digest, See. 1863
 Defendans admits the force of this statue, but claims that it does not relieve the sta.e of Che burden of seing out with reasonable certainty and precision the particular circum- stances of the crime, and Chat in tho instant case the indictment having charged and set out tha he commit- ted he murdered with his own hand he cannot be convcted all evidence Sakins to prove tha: some ether person kil- i led ltheridge and that he was pres ent aiding and abetting.
 In the, linr ied time at my com mand I have been unable to discover that this identical question has eyer been passed upon by the supreme court of fhe s'ate. But, this may be because it has been treated by the bar as too well setted to admt, o1 controversy.
 MT. Bishop, who is cited by all the courts as authority on criminal law, says:
 "When ever one persons evil in tent and another's criminal act con- bne the allegation against the' former may be either direct, that he did the thing, according to its legal eff feet, or indirect, that he instigated or procured the other 70 do it, ac- cording to it's outward form, and he did it. Whichever method is used in the averment, the proof may be that the defendant employed his personal volition, or that he instigated all- other who did the act, as may be the more convenient to the practi- toner"
 Bishops New Or. Pro. Vol. 2. Sec. 1
 And again, citing starkie's Criminal Pleading, MT. Bishop says:
 ''Where A and B are present, and A commits an offense in which B aids and assists him, the indictment may either allege the matter accord- ing to the fact, or charge them both as principals in the frs degree; for the act of one is the act of another And upon sucls an indictment, B. who was present aiding and abetting may be convicted, though A is &C., quitfed. So A and B, if present aid- ing and abetting, may be convicted, though c, a person not named in The indictment, committed the act Again if an indictment for murder charge that A gave the normal stroke, and that B was present aiding and abet- ting, both and B may be convicted, though it turn ou.; that B struck Che blow, and that A was present aiding and abetting."
 Bishops New Or. Pro. Vol. 2, Sec. 3, Par. 2.
 Tn another work, Mir. Bishop says:
 ''In felony, there are two degrees of principal offenders.
 A principal of the first degree Is one who does the act either in per- son or through an innocent agent
 A principal of the second degree is one who is present Tending his countenance. encouragement, or other men,al aid while another docs the act. But,
 The din.tinction between the two degrees is without principal effec'. It originated in this way; by the ancient law, those only were prln- cipals who are now such in the 1lrst degree, persons present and abe'tins