The Sunday telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1914-1927, 1916-09-24
GIVEN
BY HIGH COURT

DAulaAy VI ODleGLs
4. AS regards tho acts specified in
such provision, holidays are, in a
certain sense, extended judicial days.
Elk PaTte Philip Gllbertj Mcdowell
County; Prisoner demanded; Pofien-
bArger, Judgei
]. A statute covering the whole
subject Of IN earlier one or the whole
OF some branch OF the common law. not
Durporting merely to amend such stat
ute or modify such law, and plainly
showing It was intended TO be a sub
Htltute therefor, works a repeal there
OF by implication.
2. The sections OF chapter 50 Of the
code, relating TO the Jurisdiction OF
justices OF the peace in criminal
cases, deal fully and Complementary
with that subject and are construed
and interpreted as having been in
tended by the legislature to consti-
tute the exclusive rule and law de-
fining such Jurisdiction and pre-
OF. and to be substitute for all for
mer statutory or common law per-
tanning TO that subject.
3. No provision having been made
in such sections for allowance Of a
nov VI lAl W u hNlGlludlI ia q VI lililIhl
case, justice has no jurisdiction to-
set aside Il Judgment Of conviction Of
/ misdemeanor, rendered by him in
case OF which he has Jurisdiction, and
grant new trial, at the instance Of
the defendant
4. The constitution of the state
guarantees to the accused an appeal
from judgment OF justice, in a
VI - .frgt,t
but not a new trial for error in the
exercise Of the Justices Jurisdiction.
kOhn and Eiland against HerndOn,
Judge; In Probation; writ denied;
Miller, Judge:
]. When in an action in detinuo a
justice Of the peace arbitrarily or
fraudulontly and in total disregard OF
the evidence adjudges ,.e alternative
value Of the property sued for to he
less than fifteen dollars necessary to
confer Jurisdiction by appeal upon the
circuit court, and on request refuses
to award defendant an appeal within
ten days from tho date Of the judg-
ment, good cause Is thereby shown
for the award OF an appeal by the
circuit judge thereof in vacation with
in ninety days.
2. In such an action the value OF
the property is the criterion by which
the Jurisdiction Of the appellate court
Is TO be determined, irrespective OF
such arbitrary or fraudulent findings
Of the Justice. The judgment OF the
justice is only prima facie evidence
Of the jurlsdlctional fact, and may be
lmDeached or contradicted.
q Tho poua ~ - =. NFo.z 80.
GO. West Virginia, 664, distinguished
from this case.
Hissam against MOorehead, ct al;
Tyler County; Dismiss, d as IMPROVE.
IDENTIFY awarded; Williams, President:
An order refusing to entertain and
decide motion to dissolve an injunc-
ton, on tho sole ground that the
movant is under the ban Of contempt,
and has not purged himself thereof,
Is not an order refusing to dissolve
an injunction, within the meaning Of
Section /, chapter 1876, code, and Is,
therefore, not appealable.
Brown against County Court; Pres.
ton County; Decree Reversed; Demur.
rer TO Bill OVerruled, Cause Remand.
ed; Lynch, Judge;
l. The county court is without au-
thorlty to substitute one type Of road
construction material not authorized
by an election held pursuant to sec
ton 5, chapter S, acts second extra
session, 1915 Barnes Code, 1916. chan
ter %. section 56a25a), for another
type Of material expressly submitted
to the qualified voters OF the district
affected and approved by them at an
election held and conducted therein.
under said statute, for that purpose.
2. When at an election SO held and
conducted the voters authorize a bond
issue for the improvement Of a road
between certain designated points con-
nected by two roads virtually OF the
same general character and length.
neither Of them being specifically men
toned in the petition or order OF sub |
mission, the county court is vested
with ample authority to determine
which road it will undertake to i'm
prove by the expenditure of the pro-
ceeds of such authorized bond issue.
8. When two statutes of different
dates purport to cover the whole of
the same subject matter, the later one.
when plainly showing It was intend
ed to have that effect, works n repeal
of the other by implication, and be-
comes substitute therefor, although
1t does not purport to amend and re-
enact the prior statute but repeats all
acts inconsistent Herewith,
State against Hurley; Marshall
County; Judgment Affirmed; Lynch,
Judgei
l. The form of indictment prescrlb-
ed by section 8. chapter ga, code, is
valid and constitutional.
2. In a criminal case, q motion by
defendant for a bill Of particulars
must be accompanied by an affidavit
specifically showing the grounds and
reasons therefor.
8. An erroneous instruction, i'm
properly given over objection timely |
made, on an issue not involved and
hence not pertaining to the merits of
the case, and without evidence to sup
port 1t, is not prejudicial warrant |
ing reversal, II upon the facts and
circumstances proved aud not denied |
or explained verdict Of guilty as |
charged in the indictment is the only
one which could properly have been
rendered thereon.