Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

Page

Page Perry, Southern Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Satterly v. Thornton (Ky.)...

. 1088 (Ark.) ..1067 Scales, Wells y. (Tex. Civ. App.).

303 Pierce v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 565 Schaff v. Mason (Tex. Civ. App.).

288 Piper, Sovereign Camp, W. 0. W., V. Schaff, Williams y, (Mo.).

412 (Tex. Civ. App.).

649 Schellenger v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). 246 Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Car Scheps v. Giles (Tex. Civ. App.).

348 mody (Ky.)... .1070 Schmidt, Lightle v. (Ark.).

46 Plotner, State v. (Mo.).

767 Schreiner, H. Sullivan & Co. v. (Tex. Civ. Pofahl, Fairbairn V. (Ark.). 16 App.)

314 Poss v. Kuhlmann (Tex. Civ. App.) 638 Schulte, Mitchell v. (Ark.).

365 Price, Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co. v. Scott v. American Ins. Co. (Mo. App.)...1047 (Tex. Civ. App.)... 628 Scott, Simons v. (Ky.)..

..1075 Providence-Washington Ins. Co. v. Levy & Scott y, Thompson (Mo.).

115 Rosen (Tex. Com. App.). 216 Searcy v. Commonwealth (Ky.)

513 Prudential Life Ins. Co. of Texas y. Pear Seay, State v, (Mo.).

427 son (Tex. Com. App.).

967 Sebastian County, Greenwood Dist., McPruett v. Cattlemen's Trust Co. (Tex. Connell v. (Ark.).

707 Com. App.)

533 Security Life Ins. Co. of America v. Bates Pryor, Neill v. (Tes. Civ. App.). 296 (Ark.)

740 Pryor, Wagner v. (Mo. App.).

857 Security Mut. Life Ins. Co. of BinghamPumphrey v. Furlow (Ark.)

31 ton, N. Y., First Nat, Bank v. (Mo.). 832 Punch, Harrison v. (Mo.). 132 Sedberry v. Gwynn (Mo.).....

783 Pye v. Cardwell (Tex.)..

153 Shadrack v. Board of Trustees of Madison

ville Graded Common School Dist. (Ky.) 78 Rabe v. State (Tex, Cr. App.).

.1106 Shortridge v. Raiffeisen (Mo. App.).......1031 Raiffeisen, Shortridge v. (Mo. App.) .1031 Shroyer v. Chicago, R. I. & G. R. Co. (Tex. Ralls County, Buchanan v. (Mo.). .1002 Com. App.)..

..1095 Ramirez v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). .1106 Shrum y. State (Tex. Cr. App.).

575 Rau v. Rowe (Ky.)...

1070 Signor Tie Co. v. Texas Iron Ass'n (Tex. Rawlins, Moses v. (Mo. App.) 805 Civ. App.)

644 Raymond v. Ashley (Tex. Civ. App.) 992 Simons v. Scott (Ky.).

. 1075 Redus, Mitchell v. (Ark.). 47 Simpson, Fletcher v. (Ark.).

710 Reed v. Rose (Ky.). 112 Sims, Dunbar v. (Mo.).

838 Reeves v. Green (Mo.).

795 Sittig, Gardner v. (Tex. Com. App.). . 1090 Regali v. Ensley (Mo.). 773 Skinner v. Stone (Ark.).

360 Reliance Life Ins. Co. v. Hardy (Ark.). 12 Sloan v. Maradoes (Mo. App.).

883 Renfrow Commission Co. v. W. B. North Smiley v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). ..1108 rup Co. (No. App.)

487 Smith, Chicago, R. I. & G. R. Co. v. (Tex. R. E. O'Flynn & Son v. Ebelhaar (Ky.). 939

Com. App.)...

.1099 Revercomb v. Revercomb (Mo. App.). 899 Smith v. Coburn (Tex. Civ. App.),

344 Reynolds v. Kinyon (Mo.).

476 Smith v. J. M. Taylor & Co. (Ark.).... .1062 Riley y. Wallace (Kv.).. . 1085 Smith, State v. (Mo.)..

455 Rishiworth, Moss v. (Tex. Com. App.). 225 Smith, White Sewing Mach. Co. v. (Ky.).. 81 Roach, Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v.

Sodeberg, Ellerd v. (Tex, Civ. App.). 674 (Tex. Com. App.). , 159 Soehngen v. Jantzen (Mo.).

401 Road Imp. Dist. No. 1 of Cleveland Coun Sorrell v. Bradshaw (Mo.).

1024 ty, Western Union Tel. Co. y. (Ark.)... 717 | Southern Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Perry Roberts, Edwards v. (Tex. Civ. App.).... 278 (Ark.)

.1067 Roberts v. Hodges (Allo. App.).

859 Southern Traction Co. v. Kirksey (Tex. Roche v. Roche (Ky.).

Civ. App.).

702 Rodgers y. Larrimore & Perkins (Ky.)... 512 Southwestern Settlement & Development Rogers, Rundell v. (Ark.).

19 Co., Conn v. (Tex. Civ. App.)..... 612 Rose, Reed v. (Ky.).

112 Sovereign Camp, W. 0. W., V. Arthur Roselle, Ex parte (Tex. Cr. App.).

248
(Ark.)

729 Rosen, Conolly v. (Ark.)..

716 Sovereign Camp, W. 0. W., V. Bailey Ross, Iloyt v. (Ark.).. 70.5 (Tex. Com. App.).

550 Roundtree v. Meadors (Ky.)

1069 Sovereign Camp, W. 0. W., V. Piper Rowe, Rau v. (Ky.). 1070 (Tex. Ciy. App.).

619
Royal Neighbors of America v. McCullar Sovereign Camp, W. 0. W., v. Thomas
(Ark.)

708
(Ky.)

69 Rudolph v. Kelly (Ark.).

42 Sparks, Kansas City Southern R. Co. v. Rural Special School Dist. No. 11 v. Baker

(Ark.)

724 (Ark.)

732 Spencer, Kirtley v. (Tex. Civ. App.). 328 Rundell y. Rogers (Ark.).

19 Speer v. Dalrymple (Tex. Com. App.). Runnels, Metcalf v. (Mo. App.).... 894 Spivey v. Taylor (Ark.).

Spradling v. Spradling (Mo.).

813 St. Louis-San Francisco R. Co., Freie v. Stafford v. Johnson (Ky.).

929 (Mo.)

824 Stallings, Crenshaw v. (Tex. Civ. App.).. 033 St. Louis Southwestern R. Co. of Texas v. Stamper v. Commonwealth (Ky.)... .1077 Ewing (Tex, Com. App.)...

198 Starr v. Brooks (Tex. Civ. App.). 660
St. Louis Union Trust Co., Napoleon Hill Start v. National Newspaper Ass'n (Mo.
Cotton Co. v. (Mo. App.).
SS1 App.)

870 St. Louis & S. F. R. Co., Cox v. (Tex.)... 964 State v. Adkins (Mo.).

431 St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. White (Tex.).. 963 State, Alarcan v. (Tex, Cr, App.).

982 St. Louis & S. W. R. Co. of Texas, Harrell State v. Anglin (Mo.). v. (Tex, Com. App.).. 221 State, Ashcraft v. (Ark.).

376 St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Ameri State, Bartlett v. (Tex. Civ. App.). 656 can Trust Co. (Mo.)...

137 State, Bocknight v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 259 San Antonio & A. P. R. Co. V. McGill State, Bouldin y. (Tex. Cr. App.).

555 (Tex. Civ. App.) 099 State, Briggs v. (Tex. Cr. App.)..

246 Saunders v. Kaster (Mo.). 133 | State, Briscoe v. (Tex. Cr. App.).

249 Sanderson, Dillard v. (Mo.). 700 State, Brown v. (Ark.).

377 Sanderson, Inter-State Business Men's State, Brown y. (Tex. Cr. App.).

252

S6

.

174
57

[ocr errors]

776

!

54

30

.1009

(222 S.W.) Page

Page State, Charles v. (Tex. Cr. App.). : 255 Stifel, Eads v. (Mo. App.).

482 State, Clements v. (Tex. Cr. App.). .1105 Still v. Glass (Mo. App.)..

893 State, Cole y. (Ark.)....

.1060 Stinson, City of Dermott v. (Ark.). state v. Costello (Mo.). 460 Stone, Skinner v. (Ark.)..

360 State v. Covington (Tenn.).

1 Stoppelberg v. Stoppelberg (Tex. Civ. State, Crofton v. (Ark.)..

App.)

587 State v. Dale (Mo.). 763 Stowell, Woodard v. (Mo.)

815 State, Davis v. (Tex. Cr. App.)..

236 Stringer v. Johnson (Tex. Civ. App.). 267 state, Dawes v. (Tex. Cr. App.).

500 Stubbs v. Moursund (Tex. Civ. App.) 632 State, Dawson v. (Tex, Cr. App.). 557 Stumpe, Bush v. (Mo.).

.1000 State v. Ebbeller (Mo.)...

396 Stumpe, Bush v. (M0.). State, Ellis v. (Ark.).. .1058 Sullivan v. Chauvenet (Mo.).

759 State v. Gallagher (No.)

465 Sullivan & Co. v. Schreiner (Tex. Civ. App.) 314 State, Garza v. (Tex. Cr. App.)..

.1105 | Sunset Fruit & Produce Co. Gateway State, Greer v. Tex. Cr. App.). OS6 Produce Co. v. (Tex. Civ. App.).

651 State, Grissom v. (Tex, Cr. App.). 237 Sutton, Hunt v. Ky.)....

81 State v. Hardin (Mo.) 412 Swartz, Park v. (Tex.)...

156 State v. Harris (Mo.). 420 Swearengen, McLarty v. (Mo.).

392 State v. Hartman (Mo.).

412 State, Hasley y. (Tex. Cr. pp.).

579 Talerico v. Garvin (Tex. Civ. App.). 313 State, Hellman v. (Tex. Cr. App.).. ISO Taylor v. Dollins (Mo. App.)...

1010 State, Hendrix y. (Tex. Cr, App.).

980 Taylor, Moline Timber Co. v. (Ark.). 371 State, Herberg v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 559 Taylor, Patton v. (Ark.).

49 State, Hettle v. (Ark.). . 1066 Taylor, Spivey v. (Ark.).

57 State, Higgins v. (Tex. Cr. App.) 241 Taylor & Co., Smith v. (Ark.).

.1062 State, Hilliard v. (Tex. Cr. App.).

553 Temple Lumber Co., Clegg v. (Tex. Com. State, Hoover v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 211 App.)

971 State v. Hostetter (Mo.). .

750 Terminal R. Ass'n of St. Louis, Wolf y. State, Houser v. (Tex. Cr. App.).

210
(Mo.)

114 State v. Jackson (Mo.)..

746 Terry v. Adams-Hicks Zinc & Lead CorpoState v. Jarvis (Mo.). 386 ration (Mo. App.).

489 State v. Kramer (Mo.).

822 Texas City Transp. Co. v. Winters (Tex. State, Lankford v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 567 Com. App.)

511 State v. Lippman (Mo.)

436 Texas Electric Ry. v. Whitmore (Tex. State v. Linton (Mo.). . 817 Civ. App.)

644 State, Mayes y, (Tex. Cr. App.).

571 Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Roach State, Messimer v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 583 (Tex. Com. App.)

159 State v. Meyer (Mo.).

765 | Texas Iron Ass'n, Signor Tie Co. v. (Tex. State, Mitchell y. (Tex, Cr. App.). 983 Civ. App.)..

644 State v. Morgan (Mo.)

425 Texas & N. Q. R. Co. y. Weems (Tex. Com. State, Narango v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 564 App.)

972 State v. Nash (Mo.).

396 Texas & P. R. Co. v. McDowell (Tex. Civ. State y. Nave (Mo.). 741 App.)

.1109 State, Ott y, Tex, Cr. App.). 261 Tbeuber v, Marek (Tex. Civ. App.).

293 Siate, Parham v. (Tex. Cr. App.).

501 | Third Nat. Bank, John O'Brien Boiler State v. Patterson (Mo. App.)... 882 Works Co. v. (Mo.).

788 State, Pierce v. (Tex. Cr. App.)... 565 Thomas v. Commonwealth (Ky.)

931 State v. Plotner (Mo.).

767 Thomas, Sovereign Camp, W. 0. W., v. State, Rabe v. (Tex. (r. App.). 1106 (Ky.)

69 State, Ramirez v. Tex. Cr. App.). 1106 Thompkins v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). .1103 State, Schellenger v. (Tex. Cr. lpp.). 246 Thompson, Ft. Worth & D. C. R. Co. v. State v. Seay (Mo.).. 427 (Tex. Civ. App.).

289 State, Shrum v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 575 Thompson, Scott v. (Mo.).

115 State, Smiley y. (Tex. Cr. lpp.). .1108 Thompson, State v. (No.).

789 State v. Smith (Mo.). 455 Thornton, Satterly v. (Ky.).

1088 State v. Stetson (Mo.).

425 Timpson & H. R. Co. v. State (Tex. Civ. State, Thompkins v. (Tex. Cr. lpp.). .1103 App.)

322 State v. Thompson (Mo.). 789 Todd v. Fitzpatrick (Mo. App.).

888 State, Timpson & H. R. Co. v. (Tex. Civ. Toplitz, Goodman v. (Tex, Civ. App.). .1119 App.)

322 Tri-State Tel. Co., Kinney v. (Tex. Com. State, Walker v. (Tex. Cr. App.). 509 App.)

227 State, Wallace v. Tex. Cr. App.). .1104 Tudor, Lancaster .v. Tex, Civ. App.). 990 State, Watts v. (Tex. Cr. App.).

558 Twyman v. Clark (Tex, Civ. App.)...... 299 State v. Wicker (Mo.).

. 1014 State v. Wolfe (Mo.).

411 Underwood v. Hines (Mo. App.).. .1037 State, Young v. (Tex, Cr, App.). ..1103 Union Cotton Co. v. Bondurant (Ky.).... 66 State Bank v. Elgin (Mo. App.)

481 Union Station Bank, Bank of Slater v. State ex rel. Chorn v. IIudson (Mo. App.)1049 (Mo.)

993 State ex rel. Crow v. Carothers (Mo. App.)1043 United Irr. Co., Kohler v. (Tex. Civ. App.) 337 State ex rel. Meyer Bros. Drug Co. v.

United Wine Workers of America, DiaKoeln (Mo.) 389 mond Block Coal Co. v. (Kr.).

. 1079 State ex rel. Moberly Special Road Dist. of United Order of Foresters, Kribs v. (Mo.)1005

Randolph County v. Burton (Mo.). ..... 814 Enited Rys. Co. of St. Louis, Brown v. State ex rel. North Kansas City Develop

(10. App.).

890 ment Co. v. Ellison (Mo.).

783 United Rys. Co. of St. Louis, Yates v. State Line Oil & Gas Co., Good v. (Ark.) 354 (Wo. All'l.)..

.1031 Steddum, Anderson v. (Tex. ('om. App.).. 1090 Vialde Nat. Bank, Ilolmes y. (Tex. Civ. Stephens v. Curtner (Mo. App.). 497 App.)

610 Sternenberg & Co., Houston Oil Co. of Texas v (Tex. Com. App.).

534 Vallandingham v. Commonwealth (Ky.). .. 936 Stetson, State v. (Mo.).

425 Varn v. Gonzales (Tex. Com. App.). 513 Stewart v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. (Mo. l'aughin, Panhandle & S. F, R. Co. v. (Tex. App.) 1029 Com. App.)..

206 Stewart v. Chittick (Mo. App.)

963 Vernon v. American Ry. Exp. Co. (Mo. Stewart v. Omaha Loan & Trust Co. (Mo.) 808 App.)

913

Page

Page Waco Co., Ætna Ins. Co. v. (Tex. Com. White, St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. (Tex.) 963 App.)

217 White' Sewing Mach. Co. v. Smith (Ky.). . 81 Wade, Ex parte (Tex. Cr. App.). 979 Whitman, Collins v. (Mo.).

840 Wade v. Meyer (Mo. App.).

480 Whitmore, Texas Electric Ry. v. (Tex. Civ. Wagner v. Pryor (Mo. App.). 837 App.)

644 Walker v. Chatterton (Tex. Com. App.)...1100 Wichita Falls Motor Co., Central Transfer Walker v. J. N. Hirsch Cooperage Co. & Storage Co. v. (Tex. Civ. App.). 688 (Tex. Civ. App.). .1116 Wicker, State vi M0..

.1014 Walker v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). 569 Wilkerson v. Lexington (Ky.).

74 Wallace, Jackson v. (Tex. Civ. App.). 676 Williamıs, Louisville & N. R. Co. v. (Ky.) 522 Wallace, Riley v. (Ky.).. . 1085 | Williams v. Schaff (Mo.).

412 Wallace v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). . 1104 Williams Lumber Co. v. Dudley & Healen Walrath v. Crary (Mo. App.). 895 (Ark.)

353 Walterscheid, Central Nat. Bank v. (Mo. Wilson, First Nat. Bank v. (Mo.).

381 App.)

912 Wilson, Freeman v. (Tex. Com. App.). 551 Walton v. Commissioners of Light Imp. Wilson, Hempstead County v. (Ark.). 48

Dist. No. 1 of City of Benton (Ark.). .1056 Wilson v. J. W. Crowdus Drug Co. (Tex. Walton v. Corsicana Transit Co. (Tex.

Com. App.)

223 Com. App.)

979 Wilson, Ludtke v. (Tex. Civ. App.).. 351 Ward County Irr. Dist. No. 1, Ward Coun Winters, Texas City Transp. Co. v. (Tex. ty Water Imp. Dist. No, 2 v. (Tex. Civ.

Civ. App.)...

541 App.) 665 Wofford, Deck v. (Mo.).

443 Ward County Water Imp. Dist. No. 2 v. Wolf v. Terminal R. Ass'n of St. Louis Ward County Irr. Dist. No. 1 (Tex. Civ.

(Mo.)

114 App.) 665 Wolfe, State v. (Mo.).

441 Warren Hardware Co. v. Dodson (Tex.). . 157 Woodard v. Stowell (Mo.).

815 Watts v. State (Tex. Cr. App.).. 558 Woolworth Co. v. Connors (Tenn.).

.1053 W. B. Northrup Co., Charles Renfrow World Granite Co. v. Morris Bros. (Tenn.) 527 Commission Co. v. (Mo. App.)..

487 / Wynn v. Commonwealth (Ky.). ..... 955 Weems, Texas & N. 0. R. Co. v. (Tex. Com. App)...

972 Yates v. United Rys. Co. of St. Louis (Mo. Weil, Hunter v. (Mo.). 472 App.)

1034 Wells, Buerger v. (Tex.).

1.51 Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v. Helena WholeWells v. Scales (Tex. Civ. App.) 303 sale Grocery Co. (Ark.).

359 Wenzel v. O'Neal (Mo.). 392 Young, Ex parte (Tex. Cr. App.).

242 Western Union Te, Co. v. Carver (Tex. Young v. Jones Tex. Civ. App.).

091 Civ. App.) 333 Young v. State (Tex. Cr. App.)..

1103 Western Union Tel. Co. v. Road Imp. Dist.

No. 1 of Cleveland County (Ark.). 717 Zinmeister & So:is, City of Louisville v. Wheatley, Myers v. (Irk.)... 337 (Ky.)

958

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

See End of Index for Tables of Southwestern Cases in State Reports

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

THE

SOUTHWESTERN REPORTER

VOLUME 222

[ocr errors]

After setting out said former indictment STATE V. COVINGTON.

and trial, and the result thereof, and averring (Supreme Court of Tennessee. May 31, 1920.) of not guilty was final, the plea concluded

that the judgment rendered on said verdict Criminal law - 200(4)-Acquittal bar to pros- with the following averments: ecution for offense arising out of same trans "The defendant says that the offense for action.

which he was acquitted and upon which said Defendant having been acquitted on judgment of not guilty was pronounced is the charge of violating the Act of 1917, c. 12, which identical offense as the one charged the de. in sections 1, 2, and 3 denounces the offenses fendant in this case, and that the court had of receiving, possessing, and transporting lig- jurisdiction to hear and determine said case uors, cannot, though only one of the three and to pronounce said judgment. separate offenses was charged, be prosecuted “The defendant further says that the facts for others denounced arising out of the same upon which the presentment above set out was transaction, for section 6 limits the fine in such predicated and based are the identical facts cases to $500 and imprisonment to six months, upon which the presentment is predicated and and to allow the state to split the same trans- based in the present case.” action into three indictments might result in the imposition of triple penalty.

The Attorney General moved the court to

strike out said plea of a former acquittal beError to Circuit Court, Haywood County; cause it did not charge the same offense, The Thos. E. Harwood, Judge.

court overruled said motion, and, the state Shane, alias Shang, Covington, was indict- having declined to take issue, the court thereed for violating the liquor laws, and, plea of upon dismissed the case. From this action of former acquittal having been sustained, the the court the state prayed and was granted State brings error.

an appeal to this court. Affirmed.

The first three sections of chapter 12 of the W. H. Swiggart, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for Acts of 1917 are as follows: the State.

"Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Bond & Bond, of Nashville, for defendant | Assembly of the state of Tennessee, that it in error.

shall be unlawful for any person, firm or cor

poration to receive, directly or indirectly, inMCKINNEY, J. The defendant in error toxicating liquors including wine, ale and beer, was indicted at the January term, 1919, of from a common, or other carrier, in this state, the circuit court of Haywood county for vio- whether intended for personal use, or other

wise, and whether interstate or intrastate lating the liquor laws. The indictment con

shipments or transportation. tained two counts, the first charging the de

"Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, that it shall fendant in error with unlawfully receiving be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation intoxicating liquors, and the second with un- to possess intoxicating liquors, including wine, lawfully being in the possession of intoxicat- | ale and beer, hereafter received, directly or ing liquors.

indirectly, from a common or other carrier At the next term of the court the defend- ) in this state, whether intended for personal use ant in error interposed a plea of former ac

or otherwise, and whether interstate or intraquittal, which was sustained by the court, and state shipments or transportation.

“Sec. 3. Be it further enacted, that it shall the defendant in error was discharged.

be unlawful for any express company, railroad In said plea of former acquittal the de company, or any common carrier or person fendant in error set out that he had been to ship or transport into this state or from tried and had been given a verdiet of not one place to another within this state, intoxiguilty upon an indictment returned at the cating liquors including wine, ale and beer, for May term, 1918, charging that in April, 1918, any person, firm or corporation, whether in he "did transport into this state and from original packages or otherwise and whether one place to another in this state and within

intended for personal use or otherwise." the county aforesaid, intoxicating liquors, in The punishment prescribed for violating cluding wine, ale and beer, for another per- the provisions of said act is contained in secson, firm and corporation.”

tion 6 thereof, which is as follows: For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

222 S.W.-1

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

"Sec. 6. Be it further enacted, that any per- fin force and use in this state against unlawful
son, firm or corporation violating any of the gaming."
provisions of this act, shall, upon conviction,
be fined not less than fifty dollars por more

It will be noticed that this act prohibits (a)
than five hundred dollars, and in the discretion betting on a horse race, and (b) running a
of the court may be imprisoned in the county horse race.
jail or workhouse for a period of time not ex This court reversed the trial court, holding
ceeding six months."

the plea of former conviction to be good. The Had the original indictment contained three court held that there was but one transaction, counts charging, respectively, (a) receiving, and hence the matter of gaming, by betting (b) possessing, and (c) transporting liquors, ) on a horse race, was a proper subject of inand had the jury found the defendant guilty vestigation under the first indictment. In the on all three counts, under the provisions of first indictment the state could have included the act, the maximum punishment which a count for betting, but the state has no right could have been imposed would have been a to split up one transaction of this nature into fine of $500 and an imprisonment of six parts, and find an indictment on each part. months.

I

In Hite v. State, 9 Yerg. 379, an entirely The plea, which must be taken as true, says different principle was considered, and the that this was one transaction, so that if the question there involved has no bearing upon state were permitted to split this one trans- the present case. action into three parts and charge the de

We are of the opinion that the trial judge fendant with receiving in one indictment, was correct in dismissing the case, and his possessing in the second, and transporting in judgment is affirmed. the third-and the defendant should be found guilty in each case, then the court could impose a fine of $500, and an imprisonment of six months in each case. While the statute only contemplated a maximum fine of $500, LANSDEN v. CITY OF JACKSON. and an imprisonment of six months for the entire transaction.

(Supreme Court of Tennessee. May 31, 1920.) The principle involved is thus stated in 16 Corpus Juris, 272, to wit:

1. Municipal corporations 812(5) One

city commissioner cannot waive requirement "There is also another rule which declares of notice of injury. that, if the prosecution under the second in Even if the statutory requirement of podictment involves the same transaction which tice to a city of claim for personal injuries was referred to in the former indictment, and can be waived by the governing body of the it was or properly might have been, the sub-city, one of the city commissioners has no auject of investigation under that indictment, anthority to waive such requirement. acquittal or a conviction under the former indictment would be a bar to a prosecution under 2. Municipal corporations Ou 812(5)-Ratificathe last indictment. This rule is sometimes tion of commissioner's promise to pay hoscalled the same transaction test.'"

pital expenses does not waive notice of in

jury. This text is supported by a great many au Ratification by the governing body of the thorities.

city of the promise of one of the commissionIt is well illustrated in our case of Fiddler ers that the city would pay the hospital exv. State, 7 Humph. 508, in which the defend-penses of plaintiff for an examination of her ant was presented for betting on a horse injuries is not a waiver of the requirement that

notice of claim for injuries be given the city. race. To this indictment the defendant pleaded that he had been indicted for running a 3. Municipal corporations Cm812(5)-Officer's horse race along a public road, and had been waiver of right to notice can be ratified only convicted thereof on his own confession, and by formal action. punished therefor; and that said horse race A municipality can, in the absence of fraud for running which he had been so convicted or imposition, ratify an act of its officer in and punished, and the horse race for betting of claim for injuries only by formal action tak

waiving the statutory requirement of notice on which he is presented, is one and the same

en by the proper officials. horse race. To this plea thé Attorney General demurred. The court sustained the demurrer, and fined the defendant. The statute in- ty; R. B. Baptist, Judge.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Madison Counvolved was section 2 of chapter 10 of the Acts of 1833, which provides that

Action by Mrs. Maggie Lansden against “Be it enacted, that all and every person the suit and sustaining demurrer to the dec.

the City of Jackson. Judgment dismissing betting or running, aiding and abetting in running any horse race in or along any public road laration was reversed by the Court of Civil in this state, shall be liable to be indicted un- ! Appeals and the case remanded for hearing, der the same rules and provisions as are now land defendant appeals. Case dismissed.

« PreviousContinue »