The South Western Reporter

CHARITIES.

II. CONSTRUCTION, ADMINISTRATION, AND ENFORCEMENT.

37 (Mo.) Cy pres doctrine is inapplicable where no general purpose is disclosed in trust instrument.-City of St. Louis v. McAllister, 257 S. W. 425.

CHATTEL MORTGAGES.

1. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. (A) Nature and Essentials of Transfers of Chattels as Security.

33 (Mo.App.) On corn to be grown creates equitable lien when growing begins.-Klebba v. Missouri Meerschaum Co., 257 S. W. 174. (B) Form and Contents of Instruments. 45 (Ark.) Valid as between parties though mortgagor known by several names.--First Nat. Bank v. Lewis, 257 S. W. 730.

48 (Mo.App.) Covering corn to be grown on 75 acres out of 100 never became a lien. Klebba v. Missouri Meerschaum Co., 257 S. W.

174.

49(1) (Mo.App.) County in which, and person in whose possession, mortgaged property would be kept held sufficiently stated. Shanks v. Tinder, 257 S. W. 188.

COMMISSIONERS.

See Public Service Commissions.

COMMUNITY PROPERTY. See Husband and Wife, 268.

COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT.

6(2) (Tex.Civ.App.) Dispute over amount due held to support agreement for settlement.Townsend, Townsend & Co. v. South Plains Monument Co., 257 S. W. 648.

22 (Tex.Civ.App.) Answer held to allege settlement of note.-Townsend, Townsend & Co. v. South Plains Monument Co., 257 S. W. 648.

23(1) (Ky.) Burden of proof on party alleging fraud.-Jarrett v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 257 S. W. 17. held to 23(3) (Tex.Civ.App.) Evidence support finding of compromise after default in original contract.-L. D. Powell Co. v. Lee, 257 S. W. 308.

24 (Tex.Civ.App.) Whether claimed defects which caused alleged settlement existed. held properly submitted to jury.-Townsend, Townsend & Co. v. South Plains Monument Co., 257 S. W. 648.

CONDEMNATION.

II. FILING, RECORDING, AND REGISTRA- See Eminent Domain.
TION.

(A) Original.

CONSPIRACY.

II. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY. (B) Prosecution and Punishment.

88 (Mo.App.) Mortgagee held entitled to priority as against execution claimants though mortgage recorded after removal of mortgagor 48 (Ky.) Evidence sufficient to take to jury to another county. Shanks v. Tinder, 257 S. conspiracy to kill.-Marcum v. Commonwealth,

W. 188.

173(5) (Mo.App.) $50 for detention held excessive, where testimony warranted only nominal damages.-Pool v. Wilkinson, 257 S. W. 182.

257 S. W. 714.

with reference 13 (Ky.) Construed economic conditions and public policy.-Potter v. Dark Tobacco Growers' Co-op. Ass'n, 257 S. W. 33.

173(6) (Mo.App.) Whether mortgagee's acceptance of third party's note and mortgage 14 (Tex.Civ.App.) Doctrine of implied powextinguished original mortgage was for jury.-ers and restraints stated.-City of Denison v. Pool v. Wilkinson, 257 S. W. 182.

CHILDREN.

See Infants; Parent and Child.

CITIES.

See Municipal Corporations.

CLASS LEGISLATION.

See Constitutional Law, 208-251.

COMMERCE.

1. POWER TO REGULATE IN GENERAL.

19 (Tex.Civ.App.) Contemporaneous partmental interpretation of statute of great weight.-City of Denison v. Municipal Gas Co., 257 S. W. 616.

26 (Tex.Civ.App.) Constitutions restrain, but do not confer power upon, state Legislatures.-City of Denison v. Municipal Gas Co., 257 S. W. 616.

43(2) (Tenn.) Employer, electing to operate under workmen's compensation statute, may not challenge its validity.-Vester Gas Range & Mfg. Co. v. Leonard, 257 S. W. 395.

10 (Tex.Civ.App.) In absence of federal48 (Ky.) Statute upheld if validity doubtlegislation, state may legislate as to intrastate ful.-Potter v. Dark Tobacco Growers' Co-op. commerce, although interstate commerce afAss'n, 257 S. W. 33. fected. Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Graham, 257 S. W. 642.

48 (Tex.Civ.App.) Construction should favor constitutionality.-City of Denison v. Municipal Gas Co., 257 S. W. 616. DISTRIBUTION after

II. SUBJECTS OF REGULATION. 47 (Tex.Civ.App.) That passenger, checking luggage on intrastate trip, makes side trip into another state, does not make contract interstate.-Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Graham, 257 S. W. 642.

COMMERCIAL PAPER.

See Bills and Notes.

III.

OF GOVERNMENTAL POWERS AND FUNCTIONS. and Delegation

(A) Legislative Powers Thereof.

52 (Tex.Civ.App.) Statute subjecting gas utilities to regulation by Railroad Commission held constitutional.-City of Denison v. Municipal Gas Co., 257 S. W. 616.

(B) Judicial Powers and Functions,

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER 10(1) (Mo.) Must be binding on both_par70(1) (Mo.) Unconstitutional provision for ties.-Cole County v. Central Missouri Trust fee for Attorney General for enforcing anti- Co., 257 S. W. 774. trust statute not sustainable by imputing legis-10(1) (Tenn.) Either party may withdraw lative intent for payment of fee into state until both are bound.-Canton Cotton Mills v. treasury for public.-State ex rel. Barrett v. Bowman Overall Co., 257 S. W. 398. Boeckeler Lumber Co., 257 S. W. 453.

70(2) (Ark.) Conclusive presumption that 30-day notice for special act was given.-Davis v. Road Improvement Dist. No. 7 of Little River County, 257 S. W. 724.

IX. PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES,
CLASS LEGISLATION.

AND

208 (16) (Mo.) Statute requiring 30 days' notice to city of second class as condition precedent to action for injury on streets not vicious class legislation.-Randolph v. City of Springfield, 257 S. W. 449.

X. EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAWS.

211 (Ky.) Co-operative Marketing Act not offensive to equal protection provisions.-Potter v. Dark Tobacco Growers' Co-op. Ass'n, 257 S. W. 33.

XI. DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

251 (Mo.) "Due process" defined.-Hider v. Sharp, 257 S. W. 112.

285 (Mo.) Sale of property for taxes without citation to owner not "due process."Hider v. Sharp. 257 S. W. 112.

309(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) Application of federal statute as to abatement of suit in state court held to involve denial of due process.Hill v. Davis, 257 S. W. 340.

311 (Mo.) Party has right to be heard on merits of case.-State ex rel. Shoemaker v. Hall, 257 S. W. 1047.

XII. RIGHT TO JUSTICE AND REMEDIES FOR INJURIES.

321 (Mo.) Statute requiring notice of accident enacted with view of rights under Constitution. Randolph v. City of Springfield, 257 CONTEMPT.

S. W. 449.

See Injunction, 218.

I.'ACTS OR CONDUCT CONSTITUTING CONTEMPT OF COURT.

10(1) (Tex.Com.App.) When mutuality of obligation is not essential stated.-Johnson v. Breckenridge-Stephens Title Co., 257 S. W. 223. Agreement to pay stipulated percentage for abstract, made by use of plaintiff's indexes, held unilateral and without mutuality, notwithstanding uncommunicated intention to purchase equipment.-Id.

Purchase of equipment in reliance of contract lacking in mutuality a mere hazard. Id. Defendants held liable on implied promise for use of abstract indexes under contract lacking in_mutuality.-Id.

Party giving option under contract containing no reciprocal promise, and otherwise lacking consideration, may withdraw privilege at any time.-Id.

(B) Parties, Proposals, and Acceptance.

16 (Mo.) Minds of parties must meet on all terms of contract-Cole County v. Central Missouri Trust Co., 257 S. W. 774.

24 (Tenn.) Acceptance must be identical with offer, and unconditional, to be effectual.Canton Cotton Mills v. Bowman Overall Co., 257 S. W. 398.

law void.-Howell v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 105 (Mo.App.) Contracts in violation of 257 S. W. 178.

II. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION. (A) General Rules of Construction. 152 (Tex.Com.App.) Construed to put loss for breach on defaulting party.-Texlouana Producing & Refining Co. v. Wall, 257 S. W. 875.

21 (Ark.) Disregarding void order not con- 170(1) (Tenn.) Interpretation parties give tempt.-Martin v. State, 257 S. W. 752.

CONTINUANCE.

See Criminal Law, 590-617.

(Tex.Civ.App.) Refusing application for time to secure affidavit to answer held abuse of discretion. Great Southern Sulphur Co. v. Mills, 257 S. W. 573.

51(2) (Tenn.) Where continuance denied. party cannot prevent trial by withdrawing and refusing to introduce testimony.-Larus v. Bank of Commerce & Trust Co., 257 S. W. 94.

51(5) (Tenn.) Second continuance held properly denied.--Larus v. Bank of Commerce & Trust Co., 257 S. W. 94.

CONTRACTS.

See Assignments; Bills and Notes; Compromise and Settlement; Frauds, Statute of; Release; Sales; Specific Performance; Vendor and Purchaser.

I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. (A) Nature and Essentials in General. 1 (Ky.) Any modification that parties may subsequently make may be incorporated.-Common Council of City of Frankfort v. Morris, 257 S. W. 16.

10(1) (Ky.) Agreement between member and marketing association held not lacking in mutuality.-Potter v. Dark Tobacco Growers' Co-op. Ass'n, 257 S. W. 33.

ambiguous contract controls.-Canton Cotton Mills v. Bowman Overall Co., 257 S. W. 398.

(B) Parties.

con

187(1) (Mo.App.) Party for whom tract made may maintain action thereon. Moscow Mills Sav. Bank v. Sitton, 257 S. W. 1080.

Third person may maintain action against person agreeing to deliver property to him.-Id.

III. MODIFICATION AND MERGER.

237(2) (Tex.Com.App.) Extension agreewithout consideration.-Dickson v. Kilgore State ment not binding both parties for full period is Bank, 257 S. W. 867.

Agreement to extend overdue indebtedness in consideration of part payment from secured loan held binding.-Id.

V. PERFORMANCE OR BREACH.

279(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) Agreement requiring tender of bill of sale within 90 days held waived. Morris v. Shaw, 257 S. W. 974.

VI. ACTIONS FOR BREACH. 330(2) (Mo.App.) Person' for whose benefit contract is made is "real party in interest" within statute authorizing suit by such person. -Elders v. Memphis Land & Lumber Co., 257 S. W. 515.

333 (2) (Tex.Civ.App.) Pleadings held sufficiently to allege contract in writing.-Steel By

(B) Representation of Corporation by Officers and Agents.

423 (Mo.) Corporation liable for letter written by president within scope of employment, regardless of its knowledge or approval of what he wrote.-Connell v. A, C. L. Haase & Sons Fish Co.. 257 S. W. 760.

433(1) (Mo.) Whether president in writing libelous letter was acting within scope of his duties held for jury.-Connell v. A. C. L. Haase & Sons Fish Co., 257 S. W. 760.

(C) Property and Conveyances. 444 (Tex.Civ.App.) Purchasers of interest in leasehold estate held liable on note notwithstanding absence of corporate seal from conveyance.-Rio Grande Oil Co. v. Barker, 257 S. W. 967.

(D) Contracts and Indebtedness. 472 (Tenn.) Negotiable Instruments Act applies to public and corporate bonds.-Nickey Bros. v. Lonsdale Mfg. Co., 257 S. W. 403.

113(5) (Mo.App.) County court may employ other attorneys than prosecuting attorney to advise it as to township bond issue.State ex rel. Wammack & Welborn v. Affolder, 257 S. W. 493.

IV. FISCAL MANAGEMENT, PUBLIC DEBT, SECURITIES, AND TAXATION.

1532 (Ky.) Local registrar of vital statistics has both local and general duties, so that certificates for payment of fees is not appropriation for payment of state officer.-Furlong v. Darnaby, 257 S. W. 707.

Compiling vital statistics is necessary for public well-being, for funds may be appropriated.-Id.

161 (Ky.) Payment of local registrar of vital statistics must come from general funds.Furlong v. Darnaby, 257 S. W. 707.

V. CLAIMS AGAINST COUNTY.

proper

Bank accepting corporation bonds as collater-205(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) Certiorari al to corporation's president's loan "holder in proceeding to question judgment of commisdue course."-Id. sioners' court.-Fox v. Cameron County, 257 S. W. 1111.

(F) Civil Actions.

503 (2) (Tex.Civ.App.) Statute held to authorize suit against converter bank in county where fraud of another defendant occurred. Littlefield State Bank v. Moore, 257 S. W. 1007.

206(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) Judgment of commissioners' court allowing premium on collector's bond not collaterally attacked.-Fox v. Cameron County, 257 S. W. 1111.

VI. ACTIONS.

521 (Mo.) Instruction as to whether letter written by president of corporation bound cor-213 (Tex.Civ.App.) What must be done beporation held sufficient.-Connell v. A. C. L. Haase & Sons Fish Co., 257 S. W. 760,

VIII. INSOLVENCY AND RECEIVERS. 548(8) (Mo.) Petition to subject real estate claimed by stockholder to judgment against corporation, failing to allege fraud, held to state

no equity.-Potts-Turnbull Advertising Co. v. Gatchell, 257 S. W. 134.

fore county can be sued on claim, stated.-McLennan County v. Miller, 257 S. W. 680.

222 (Tex.Čiv.App.) What petition must allege, stated.-McLennan County v. Miller, 257 S. W. 680.

COURTS.

See Contempt; Justices of the Peace.

I. NATURE. EXTENT, AND EXERCISE of JURISDICTION IN GENERAL.

548 (9) (Mo.) Evidence held insufficient to establish conveyance of realty in satisfaction of 2 (Tex.Civ.App.) Jurisdiction not dependcorporate indebtedness.-Potts-Turnbull Adver. dent on correctness of rulings.-Fox v. Camtising Co. v. Gatchell, 257 S. W. 134. eron County, 257 S. W. 1111.

1135

INDEX-DIGEST

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

II. ESTABLISHMENT, ORGANIZATION,
AND PROCEDURE IN GENERAL.

involving claim against decedent's estate.-Wil-
lis v. Graf, 257 S. W. 664.

(A) Creation and Constitution, and Court 475(1) (Tex.Civ.App.) Action abated be-

Officers.

50 (Mo.App.) Circuit court of a county is
one court, although having different divisions.
Case v. Smith, 257 S. W. 148.

cause of another pending in another jurisdiction
under rule of comity between courts to avoid
S. W. 697.
multiplicity of suits.-Fulmore v. Benson, 257

(B) State Courts and United States Courts.

57(2) (Mo.) Salaries of reporters based
upon population of circuit rather than of most
populous county in circuit.-State ex rel. Geas-489(11) (Mo.) Whether right of national
lin v. Walker, 257 S. W. 470.

banks to act as executors is in contravention
of the state or local law is a question for the

(C) Rules of Court and Conduct of Busi-state courts.-State ex rel. Burnes Nat. Bank
of St. Joseph v. Duncan, 257 S. W. 784.

ness.

78 (Tex.Com.App.) Court rule depriving
litigant of statutory right unconstitutional.-
Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Stewart &
Threadgill, 257 S. W. 526.

(D) Rules of Decision, Adjudications,
Opinions, and Records.

97(1) (Tex.) Conformity with decision of
the United States Supreme Court desirable.-
Tillman County Bank of Grandfield, Okl., v.
Behringer, 257 S. W. 206.

III. COURTS OF GENERAL ORIGINAL JU-
RISDICTION.

(B) Courts of Particular States.
142 (Mo.) Circuit courts are courts of gen-
eral "jurisdiction."-State ex rel. Shoemaker
v. Hall, 257 S. W. 1047.

IV. COURTS OF LIMITED OR INFERIOR
JURISDICTION.

169(5) (Tex. Civ.App.) Amount in contro-
versy held not in excess of that of which coun-
ty court had jurisdiction.--Knoohuizen v. Nich-
oll, 257 S. W. 972.

170 (Tex.Civ.App.) Jurisdiction of county
court not sworn by allegation of damages.
where cause of action is to enforce contract.-
Mebane Cotton Breeding Ass'n v. Sides, 257
S. W. 302.

170 (Tex.Civ.App.) All intendments in fa-
vor of pleading in ascertaining whether amount
in controversy is in excess of court's jurisdic-
tion. Knoohuizen v. Nicholl, 257 S. W. 972.
VI. COURTS OF APPELLATE JURIS-

DICTION.

(B) Courts of Particular States.

231 (4) (Mo.App.) Holding that false state-
ment by insured was not material misrepre-
sentation held not in conflict with another de-
cision. Emery v. New York Life Ins. Co., 257
S. W. 162.

CRIMINAL LAW.

See Arson; Assault and Battery, 83-96;
of the Peace; Bur-'
Bail, 49; Breach
Disorderly
48;
Conspiracy,
glary;
House; Embezzlement; Extradition; False
Pretenses; Forgery; Grand Jury; Homi-'
cide; Indictment and Information; Larceny;
Miscegenation; Rape, 4-52; Robbery;
Seduction, 31-50.

un-

III. PARTIES TO OFFENSES.
59(1) (Ky.) Prearrangement, mutual
derstanding or concert of action unnecessary to
make one aider or abettor, but participation
necessary.-Bradley v. Commonwealth, 257 S.
W. 11.

59(3) (Ky.) "Aider" or "abettor" must be
actually or constructively present.-Bradley v.
"abettor" must
Commonwealth, 257 S. W. 11.
59(5) (Ky.) "Aider"
participate in commission of act.-Bradley v.
Commonwealth, 257 S. W. 11.

VI. LIMITATION OF PROSECUTIONS.

147 (Tex.Cr.App.) Prosecutions for mur-
der alone survive beyond three years.-McKin-
ney v. State, 257 S. W. 258.

VIII. PRELIMINARY COMPLAINT, AFFI-
DAVIT, WARRANT, EXAMINATION,
AND SUMMARY
COMMITMENT,
TRIAL.

W. 752.

231 (6) (Mo.) Full faith and credit or obli-
gation of contraet held not involved in action241 (Ark.) Circuit courts may not com-
on insurance policy. Zach v. Fidelity & Casu- mit persons accused of crime to state peniten-
alty Co. of New York, 257 S. W. 124.
231(6) (Mo.) St. Louis Court of Appeals tiary for safe-keeping.-Martin v. State, 257 S.
without jurisdiction to decide constitutional
case held not required to read information or
questions.-State ex rel. Shoemaker v. Hall,254 (Tex.Cr.App.) Court in misdemeanor
257 S. W. 1047.
231(8) (Mo.) Constitutional questions, giv- complaint. Quisenbury v. State, 257 S. W. 502.
ing Supreme Court jurisdiction held not in-258 (2) (Ark.) Refusal to quash judgment
Spore v. State, 257 S. W. 362.
volved.--Zach v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of of justice court on certiorari held not error.-
New York, 257 S. W. 124.

231(18) (Mo.) Refusal of evidence obtained
under search warrant eliminated question as
to give evidence
to compelling defendant
against himself.-State v. Mullinix, 257 S. W.

121.

246 (Tenn.) Supreme Court without juris-
diction of appeal from circuit court involving
commitment of minor.-State v. Brown, 257 S.
W. 415.

VIII. CONCURRENT AND CONFLICTING
JURISDICTION, AND COMITY.

(A) Courts of Same State, and Transfer of

Causes.

472(4) (Tex.Civ.App.) District court held
to have jurisdiction in foreclosure suit, though

323 (Ky.) Jurors presumed to be of ordi-
nary understanding.-Smith v. Commonwealth,
257 S. W. 720.

(B) Facts in Issue and Relevant to Is-
sues, and Res Gestæ.

338(1) (Ark.) All evidence tending to
prove the issue is admissible, and evidence of
collateral facts inadmissible.-Tullis v. State,
257 S. W. 380.

purposely, held competent as silent admission.
Thomas v. State, 257 S. W. 376.

414 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence of statement
of accused by witness who heard it admissible.
-Garcia v. State, 257 S. W. 558.

419, 420 (2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Statement of
district attorney as to defendant having made a
confession held hearsay.--Williams v. State,
257 S. W. 544.

(G) Acts and Declarations of Conspirators

and Codefendants.

351 (10) (Tex.Cr.App.) Officer's testimony
of unsuccessful efforts to get defendant's
brother as witness inadmissible as criminating. 423 (2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Conversation of wit-
-Ogburn v. State, 257 S. W. 887.
ness with coconspirator in accused's absence
held properly received to show furtherance of
common design.-Gonzales v. State, 257 S. W.
251.

365(1)(Tex.Cr.App.) That defendant had
pistol admissible as res gestæ.-Hill v. State,
257 S. W. 262.

365 (1) (Tex.Cr.App.) That gloves of own-427 (5) (Ky.) Declarations of one conspir-
er of stolen chickens were found in defendant's ator in absence of another incompetent.-Mar-
truck admissible as res gestæ.-Landry v. State, cum v. Commonwealth, 257 S. W. 714.
257 S. W. 561.

368(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Communications be-
tween husband and wife held res gestæ when
in presence of others.-Davis v. State, 257 S.

W. 1099.

(1) Opinion Evidence.

459 (Tex.Cr.App.) Testimony liquor was
whisky not inadmissible, though a conclusion.
-Hunter v. State, 257 S. W. 1104.

equip-

472 (Tex.Cr.App.) Sufficiency of
ment for manufacturing of liquor admissibie in
prosecution for transportation.-Hill v. State,
257 S. W. 262.

369(6) (Ky.) Testimony as to possession
of liquor admissible in prosecution for manu-478(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Bar tender's testi-
facture. Fornash v. Commonwealth, 257 S. W. mony classifying liquor found in accused's pos-
session held properly received.-Gonzales v.
State, 257 S. W. 251.

24.

370 (Ark.) Evidence of other transactions
admissible to show guilty knowledge.-Hall v.478(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) That mash could be
State, 257 S. W. 61.
used to make liquor admissible in prosecution
for transporting equipment.-Hill v. State, 257
S. W. 262.

371(2) (Ark.) Evidence of other transac-
tions admissible to show guilty intention.-
Hall v. State, 257 S. W. 61.

371 (5) (Ark.) Evidence tending to show (J) Testimony of Accomplices and Code-
forgery of other instruments than that set out

fendants.

in indictment held admissible to show guilty in-507 (1) (Ky.) Test as to who are accom-
tent.-McCoy v. State, 257 S. W. 386.
plices. Crouch v. Commonwealth, 257 S. W.
20.

Proof of similar acts admissible to show
guilty intent.-Id.

371 (10) (Tex.Cr.App.) Testimony of sales
admissible in prosecution for possessing for
sale. Atwood v. State, 257 S. W. 563.

372(2) (Ark.) Evidence of previous raids
and the finding of liquor admissible to show en-
gagement in business.-McMiller v. State, 257

S. W. 366.

374 (Tex.Cr.App.) That witnesses could
not fix exact time of purchases held immaterial.
-Atwood v. State, 257 S. W. 563.
Proof of previous sales by more than three
witnesses not objectionable.-Id.
376 (Tenn.) Defendant's bad reputation
after crime incompetent as to his character.—
Tucker v. State, 257 S. W. 850.

(D) Materiality and Competency in Gen-
eral.

394 (Ky.) Evidence procured under void
search warrant incompetent.-Miller v. Com-
monwealth, 257 S. W. 3.

507(1) (Ky.) One selling whisky not ac-
complice in transportation.-McGinnis v. Com-
monwealth, 257 S. W. 27.

507 (2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Witness who testi-
fied she assisted defendant charged with bur-
glary to conceal stolen property held accom-
plice within rule as to corroboration.-Ballard
v. State, 257 S. W. 547.

507 (4) (Ky.) Police officers not accomplices
within evidence rule.-Mabry v. Commonwealth,
257 S. W. 1030.

5072 (Ky.) Evidence held to show witness
not accomplice.-Crouch v. Commonwealth, 257
S. W. 20.
to

5071⁄2 (Ky.) Participation necessary
make one accomplice.-McGinnis v. Common-
wealth, 257 S. W. 27.

Evidence held to show witness not an accom-
plice.-Id.

508(9) (Ky.) Conviction may be based on
testimony of police officers purchasing liquor.
-Mabry v. Commonwealth, 257 S. W. 1030.

394 (Ky.) Officers properly pursued one511(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence corrobora-
fleeing with sack, and no error in permitting
them to testify to contents.-Cassady v. Com-
monwealth, 257 S. W. 721.

395 (Ky.) Officer properly searched buggy
without search warrant, and evidence admissi-
ble. Cole v. Commonwealth, 257 S. W. 713.
(E) Best and Secondary and Demonstra-

tive Evidence.

400 (9) (Tex.Cr.App.) Statement of district
attorney as to defendant having made a con-
fession held secondary evidence.-Williams v.
State, 257 S. W. 544.

402(1) (Ky.) Officer issuing search war-
rant proper witness to prove loss.-Miller v.
Commonwealth, 257 S. W. 3.

tive of accomplice held insufficient to sustain
conviction.-Ballard v. State, 257 S. W. 547.

511(2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Testimony of ac-
complice must be corroborated by other testi-
mony connecting accused with crime.-Ballard
v. State, 257 S. W. 547.

(K) Confessions.

518(2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Question to defend-
ant whether he had signed confession held im-
proper. Williams v. State, 257 S. W. 544.

Evidence of confession made under arrest in-
admissible without showing that defendant
warned.--Id.

Statement of defendant in nature of confes-
sion while under arrest and unwarned held
inadmissible. Id.

(F) Admissions, Declarations, and Hear-519(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Confession made by

say.

407(2) (Ark.) Deceased's dying statement
in accused's presence, that accused shot him

defendant to owner of stolen cattle accompa-
nied by deputy sheriff not known to be an offi-
cer by defendant held admissible, though not

« 이전 계속 »

도서

The South Western Reporter, 257권