Cross-bill not passed on when judgment affirmed. Hill vs. Silvey,

501(3).

Dismiss, motion to, not passed on, where judgment affirmed. Ibid. Evidence, error in rejecting, not considered where not appear what it was. Askew vs. Carr, 685(2).

Evidence, ground of objection to admissibility of, not disclosed, not considered. Tarver vs. Torrance, 261(2).

Evidence, rejection of some competent not necessarily cause reversal. Van Winkle vs. Wilkins, 94(9).

Exceptions to rulings of judge made in writing on exceptions filed to auditor's report, will be considered, though final judgment not excepted to. Parker vs. Waycross & Florida Railroad, 387(1).

Final judgment; threat of superior court to remove executor unless he give bond, not reviewable until done. Powell vs. Hammond, 567(3).

Hardship of decision, when constrained by the law, appeals urging, not listened to. Deyton vs. Bell, 371(3).

Harmless error not work reversal. Clower vs. Fleming, 247(4). Interrogatory, answer to cross, not full enough, error in overruling, objection to, not considered, when. Roberts vs. Crowley, 429(2).

Irrelevant evidence admitted; if immaterial or nearly so, not cause reversal. Mayor vs. Caldwell, 76(6).

Mistakes in record, suggestions of, too late, if not made before call Haas vs. Kansas City Railroad, 792(3b).

of case.

Newly discovered evidence, credibility of witnesses establishing, must appear. Dominick vs. State, 715.

Parties; contest between creditors only on money rule, sheriff need not be made a party defendant in error. Moore vs. Brown, 10(2).

Presumption is in favor of correctness of judgment below. Wikle vs. Woolley, 119(3).

Reinstate dismissed case, court will, where sole counsel for plaintiff in error absent from sudden access of illness, Moore vs. Brown, 10(1).

Same: If other circuit reached before reinstatement, will be continued or heard on briefs. Ibid.

Reinstatement of dismissed case; wife of counsel of plaintiff in error about to be confined, insufficient, when. Evans vs. Kilby, 278.

Return of indictment into court, record not disclosing what minutes showed as to, clerk required to complete, under 84272(g). Bowen vs Siate, 484.

Rule out testimony; must appear motion was made before close of case to jury. Wright vs. State, 745.

Verdict finding answers to questions submitted under 24206, no writ of error lies to, until judgment entered. McGowan vs. Lufburrow, 358.

Same: Leave granted to enter exceptions pendente lite on return of case. Ibid.

PRESCRIPTION.

Adverse possession, question of, is one of intent, and turns on bona fides of tenant. Ware vs. Barlow, 7.

Charge as to, though erroneous here, not work reversal. Clower vs. Fleming, 247(4).

Constructive notice not make title fraudulent. Ware vs. Barlow, 6. Ejectment; title ripened by prescription in defendant before amendment filed laying demise in remaindermen, no recovery. Jones vs. Johnson, 294(3).

Forged bond for title; bond by pretended agent without authority is good color of title. Millen vs. Stines, 655.

Same: Simmons vs. Lane, 25 Ga. 178, distinguished. Ibid. Grant, plaintiff having good prescriptive title may recover in ejectment without showing. Parker vs. Waycross & Florida, 392. Innocent purchaser from agent of two executors, protected against

mistake of law on his part, when. Ware vs. Barlow, 1(la). Possession must not originate in fraud, as used in code, means actual not legal fraud. Ibid. 1(1).

Same: Hunt vs. Dunn, 74 Ga. 120, doubted and distinguished. Ibid.

Private way, person claiming, must bring himself strictly within the law; what must appear, stated. Collier vs Farr, 749. Tenant for life, one holding under, acquires no title against remaindermen suing within seven years. Bagley vs. Kennedy, 721(1).

Trustee barred by, beneficiaries are also; rule defined and explained. East Rome Co. vs. Cothran, 359(2).

PRESUMPTIONS. See Illegality; Practice in Supreme Court.

Forged, that deed is, arise from certificate of executive department that was no such attesting officer in that county. Parker vs. Waycross & Fiorida Railroad, 393.

Indictment no presumption that it was returned regularly, if minutes show none. Bowen vs. State, 483.

Jurisdiction: term of return of bill not appearing, presumption is chancellor had proof before him, as to, before decreeing. Mayer vs. Hover, 315(3).

Mental competency of witness examined by interrogatories, presumed. Mayor vs. Caldwell, 76(4).

Virility, normal powers of, presumed in mature male person. Gardner vs. State, 144(4).

PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. See Contracts.

Authority of P. to act as agent for company, cannot be proved by declarations of a director. Fla. Midland vs. Varnedoe, 176(3). Same: Nor by newspaper report of a company meeting. Ibid. 176(4).

Holding one out as agent, what facts amount to, by a railroad company. Ibid. 176(8).

Sayings of one man cannot make another, or a corporation, his principal; error to refuse charge, when. Ibid.

Undisclosed principal may sue on contract of affreightment, but agency must be alleged and proved. Atlanta & West Point Co. vs. Texas Grate Co. 602(2).

PRINCIPAL AND SURETY.

Administrator reviving barred debt and sureties liable thereon, discussed. Crabtree vs. Graham, 290.

Bond of sheriff guilty of official misconduct, may be sued on, before recovery against him. Jefferson vs. Hartley, 716.

Discharged, surety is, where creditor agreed to take mortgage with waiver of homestead, and took usurious and void one. Small vs. Hicks, 691(1).

Duress of illegal imprisonment, principal signing under, surety not bound. Patterson rs. Gibson, 802(1).

Same: Knowledge of imprisonment but not of illegality, not alter case. Ibid.

Notice to sue; presumption feeble that creditor preserved it. Crawfood vs. Hodge, 728.

Same: Notice to produce dispensed with, if facts show it would be nugatory. Ibid.

Plea by surety that principal signed under duress of illegal imprisment and want of knowledge by surety, error to strike. Patterson vs. Gibson, 802.

Principal not liable for any cause, surety not liable. Ibid. 804.

v 81-56

Relieved; surety on note who was also landlord to tenant, is not, by payee making further advances, and taking mortgage on crop. Stokes vs. Gillis, 187.

Same: Nor by payee taking crop on which surety had landlord's lien for rent. Ibid.

Same: Surety could recover of payee value of the rent, or amount of his damage. Ibid.

Tax fi. fa. of comptroller against collector, sureties paying off, subrogated to all the rights and liens of the State. Irby vs. Livingston, 281.

PRIVATE WAYS.

Obstructions, applicant to obtain removal of, must show what. Collier vs. Farr, 749.

PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS. See Libel; Notice to Produce.

PROBABLE CAUSE. See Malicious Prosecution.

PROFITS. See Damages.

PROMISSORY NOTES.

Collateral security, though transferred as, title is in holder. Andrew vs. Stewart, 53(2).

Same: As to rights of transferee of rent note under acts 1882-3, p. 109. Ibid.

Conditions precedent in notes given for instalments of subscription to capital stock of railroad, discussed. Johnson vs. Georgia Midland, 725.

66

Fraud in bank discounting note given for flour, having already discounted draft drawn against same shipment, facts here not establish. Boatmen's Bank vs. Western & Atlantic, 121(1, 2). Maturity of notes for instalments of subscription to stock of railroad, payable on completion of section ready for the cross-ties," etc., discussed. Johnson vs. Ga. Midland, 725. Same: Recitals as to privilege to be secured, as to how road to be operated, and as to side tracks, not conditions precedent, when. Ibid.

Purchase money of land; note given to heir for her interest "to be paid when he got possession," held to be due under special facts here. James vs. Hutcherson, 451.

Same: Administrator having sold and maker buying, entitled to his part of proceeds of sale, and if he failed to get it, may set off against note. Ibid.

Purchase money of mule, reserving title; if seller transfers it, he cannot recover in trover, without surrendering note. Tidwell vs. Burkett, 84.

Same: Bringing the action is equivalent to a rescission.
Ibid.

Rent; note here was for, though as printed adapted to advances also. Andrew vs. Stewart, 53(4).

PUBLIC POLICY.

Privileged communications in pleadings; protection on grounds of, discussed. Wilson vs. Sullivan, 238(1).

RAILROADS.

Agent, authority of P. to act as, cannot be proved by declarations of a director. Florida Midland vs. Varnedoe, 176(3).

Same: Nor by newspaper report of a company meeting.
Ibid. 176(4).

Agent to contract for cross-ties, what facts amount to a holding of one out as an. Ibid. 176(8).

Alight in safety, if reasonable time allowed to, no recovery. Covington vs. Western & Atlantic Railroad, 273(3).

Aliter, if reasonable time not allowed, and passenger jumped, when. Ibid.

Alight, reasonable time to; evidence here conflicting, and recovery sustained. Atlanta & West Point Railroad vs. Smith, 620(1). Assault and battery on licensee of right to sell lunches, by competitor in trade, road not liable for. Fluker vs. Georgia Railroad, 461(4).

Bill of lading, assignee of, has no greater rights than assignor. Haas vs. Kansas City Railroad, 792(3a).

Same: Assignor knowing shipment was not as yet received by road issuing, cannot recover for delays on previous road caused by armed mob. Ibid.

Bill of lading, evidence to contradict terms of, inadmissible. Skellie vs. Central Railroad, 56(3).

Bill of lading; fraud of consignor in dealings with consignee, not affect holder, when. Boatmen's Bank vs. Western & Atlantic Railroad, 221(2).

Same: Consignee here having got possession of the goods from carrier, gave consignee his note for the price and paid it, carrier held liable. Ibid.

Bill of lading important security of commerce, and not defeated by presumption. Ibid. 221(3).