INDICTMENT.

1. Killing live stock: An indictment under the Act of 1868-'69, chap. 253, (Bat-
tle's Revisal, chap. 32, sec. 95,) for the killing live stock under certain
circumstances, which charges that the defendant on &c., at &c.,
"A cer-
tain mule of the value of one hundred dollars, the property of one J. S.
E., the said mule being then and there within an inclosure not sur-
rounded by a lawful fence, unlawfully and wilfully did abuse, injure and
kill contrary," &c., is sufficient, though it would have been more satis-
factory if it had stated whose the inclosure was, whether the defendant's
or some other person. State v. Allen, 23.

2. Receiving stolen goods: If a person receive stolen goods, knowing them
to be such, not for the purpose of making them his own, or of deriving
profit from them, but simply to aid the thief in carrying them off, he is
guilty of the crime of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to have
been stolen. State v. Rushing, 29.

3. Stealing a horse: Where an indictment charged the larceny of a horse to
have been committed at a certain time since the passage of the statute
which prescribed the punishment of such a larceny, and the defendant
was found guilty, judgment cannot be arrested upon the ground that
prior to that time there had been several statutes prescribing different
modes of punishment. State v. Evans, 40.

4. Different counts; stealing and receiving stolen goods: On an indictment
charging the defendant in the first count with stealing, and in the second
with receiving stolen goods, he may be found guilty generally, because
the offenses are of the same grade, and the punishment is the same, and
the verdict may be sustained, though on a trial at the preceding term,
the jury found the defendant guilty of receiving stolen goods, which
verdict the judge set aside and ordered a new trial. State v. Speight, 72.
5. Forgery, what to allege: Where an indictment charged the forgery of the
name of a firm with intent to defraud two persons whose names were
stated, but it was not alleged that they composed the firm, and the testi-
mony proved the forgery with an intent to defraud the firm, but it was
not proved that the two persons named composed the firm, held that the
allegations of the indictment were not proved, and that it was error in
the court to charge otherwise. State v. Harrison, 144.

6. Variance: In an indictment for perjury, where the defendant is charged
with having been sworn "on the Holy Gospels of God," and it appeared
that he was not sworn as charged, such variance is fatal and will entitle
defendant to a new trial. State v. Mat. Davis, 383.

7. Perjury, what should be charged: In a criminal action for perjury, it should
appear on the face of the indictment that the oath taken was material to
the question depending, not by setting forth the circumstances which
render it so in describing the proceedings of a former trial, but by a gen-
eral allegation that the particular question became material. State v.
Davis,,495.

8. Forgery, proof necessary: Indictment for forging a bond or other instru-
ment is sustained by proof of the forgery of the name of one of the ob-
ligors in the bond. State v. Ben. Davis, 313.

SEE FORGERY, 1, 2.

IN FORMA PAUPERIS.

Appeal to Supreme Court: A Judge of the Superior Court has no power to
make an order authorizing a person who has been permitted to sue in
forma pauperis to appeal to the Supreme Court without giving security
for the costs of the appeal, and for the want of such security the appeal
will be dismissed with costs. Mitchell and wife v. Sloan, Ex'r et al., 10.

INJUNCTION.

1. Affidavit, what to state: In an application for an injunction, an affidavit for
it made by a person not a party, that what he has stated in the com-
plaint as of own knowledge is true, &c., is insufficient, because not being
a party he has stated nothing. Martin v. Sloan et al., 128.

2. Bond: A bond for $5,000 given by a party upon obtaining an injunction,
and one for $10,000 given by a receiver upon being appointed such, are
palpably insufficient where severa. hundred thousand dollars are in-
volved in the issue. Ibid.

3. Error to grant perpetual injunction, when: A perpetual injunction against
issuing an execution on a judgment at law, g.anted upon motion and
affidavits is erroneous. It is not in accordance with and allowable mode
of proceeding under the old system or the new. Whitehurst, Trustee v.
Green, Ex'r, 131.

4. Restraining the sale of lands: An order restraining the sale of certain pre-
mises, to which the plaintiff claims title, will be continued to the final
hearing, and the plaintiff's right protected, if the complaint and affi-
davits disclose merits on his part. Dockery v. French, 308.

SEE COUNTIES, 2.

INSOLVENT DEFENDAN S.

To enable them to appeal, what must appear: To enable lusolvent defendants,
convicted in criminal actions to appeal from judgments of the Court
below, it must appear by affidavit, that they are wholly unable to give
security for the costs, and that they are advised by counsel that they
have reasorable cause for the appeal prayed for, and that the application
is in good faith. State v. Divine et al., 390.

SEE APPEAL, 4.

INTEREST.

Promissory note: When a promissory note is given with a stipulation that
the interest is to be paid annually or semi-anuually, the maker is
chargeable with interest at the like rate upon each deferred payment of
interest, as if he had given a promissory note for the amount of such
interest. By this mode of computation compound interest is not given,
but a middle course is taken be ween simple and compound interest.
Bledsoe v. Nixon et al., 89.

INVESTMENT OF MONEY.

1. Duties of Clerk, &c.: When money is invested by a clerk or other officer
under the orders of a Court, the clerk or other officer cannot change the

investment without the sanction of the Court or the parties, and if he does so, he will be responsible for any loss that may accrue, for he will be held to a much stricter accountability than a guardian or trustee would be under similar circumstances, because he clerk or other officer might get the consent of the parties or the advice and direc ion of the Court, while the guardian or trustee would be compelled generally to act upon his own judgment. Rountree v. Barnett et al., 76. Same: While generally a clerk or other offices cannot change an inve-tment which he has made under the order of a Court, yet if a suduen and unexpected loss is threatened, he may do so, but in such case he must show a necessity for such prompt action, and that he acted in good faith and with ordinary prudence and he must, as soon as he can, repo't his action to the Court. Ibid.

JUDGE OF SUPERIOR COURT.

SEE AMENDMENT. 1; IN FORMA PAUPERIS; PRACTICE, 4.

JUDGE'S CHARGE.

SEE CRIM. PRACTICE, & ., 5.

JUDGMENT.

1. Irregular, how set aside: An irregular judgment may be set aside at any time, and an injured party is not confined to a year after be has notice of it. A motion to vacate such judgment is the proper course to pursue, giving the opposing party notice of such motion. Cowles v. Cooper, 406. 2. Parties to an action on: A judgment is rendered on a note against the maker, B, a citizen of Cumberland, in favor of the payee, A, a citizen of Lenoir; the judgment is assigned, and after assignment, C, also a citizen of Lenoir, writes his name across the back of the note. In a suit by the assignee against B and C on the judgment: Held, That B and C were improperly joined in the action: Held further, That if C's name had been stricken from the process the Justice had no jurisdiction. Wooten v. Maultsby, 462.

3. Value of property, when to be assessed: In an action for claim and delivery of personal property (Replevin, Rev. Code, chap. 98), when the property cannot be re-delivered by plaintiff in specie, the value thereof, in case of a judgment for defendant, should be assessed at the time of the trial, and not at the time of its seizure by the sheriff. Holmes v. Godwin, 467.

4. Payment to clerk, how shown: Whenever it is sought to establish an authority in a clerk, to bind a plaintiff by the receipt of depreciated currency in payment of a judgment, it must be shown either that the receipt was expressly authorized by the plaintiff, or, that the plaintiff has done acts from which such an authority may fairly be implied. Purvis v. Jackson, 474.

5. Same, clerk as agent: Acts from which such an agency in the clerk beyond what the law (Rev. Code, chap. 31, sec. 127,) gives him, may be implied, must be such as under the circumstances were reasonably calculated to induce the debtor to believe that the clerk was the creditor's agent for the purpose; as, for instance, that the creditor had procured an order to collect the money; or had issued an execution without instructing the

sheriff what ind of money he was to receive in payment, &c. And if,
from such acts, the debtor has been reasonably led to believe that the
clerk was authorized to receive payment of a judgment in Confede-
rate money, and acting on that belief, pays the judgment in such money,
it is immaterial whether the clerk was really the agent or not; the cred-
itor being estopped from denying the agency, and the debtor protected
in his judgment. Ibid.

6. Same in Confederate money: Where a plaintiff, before the war, obtained a
judgment against an administrator, but issued no execution thereon and
demanded no payment thereof, either before or during the war, and upon
the defendant's voluntarily paying the amount of the judgment into the
Clerk's office in 1863, the plaintiff as soon as he heard thereof at once re-
pudiated such payment: Held, That notwithstanding prudent business
men in the same community and at the time were receiving Confederate
money in payment of debts, still the plaintiff might disregard such pay.
ment by the defendant altogether, and recover the whole amount of the
original judgment. Ibid.

7. When a lien: By virtue of sec. 254, C. C. P, a judgment from the time it is
docketed is a lien on all the interest of whatever kind the defendant has
in real estate, whether it be such as can be seized under execution or not.
Hoppock, Glenn & Co v. Shober, 153.

8. Lien on lands, &c.: Under our former system a judgment did not bind
lands proprio vigore, but if an execution (f. fa.) was taken out upon the
judgment, it would bind the land from its teste, and the lien thus acquired
could be continued by issuing of alias and pluries executions regularly
from term to term without intermission, but not otherwise. Hadley v.
Nash, 162.

See AGREEMENT, 1; COUNTERCLAIM, 1; LIEN, 1.

JUSTICE OF THE PEACE.

1. Jurisdiction: A Justice of the Peace has no jurisdiction under the Con-
stitution, árt 4., sec. 15 and 33 of a suit on a constable's bond, the penalty
of which is more than $200, although the damages to be assessed are less
than that sum, and Act of 1869–70, chap. 169, sec. 13, cannot be allowed
the effect of conferring such jurisdiction.

It seems that as against the officer alone a Justice of the Peace has jurisdic-
tion of a suit for a sum less than $200 collected by the plaintiff and not
paid over. Fell & Bro. v. Porter et al., 141.

2. Same, account split up: A'party has a right to "split up" his account so as
to include a certain number of items under one warran and a certain
number under another, and so on, so as to bring the several warrants
under the juristiction of a Justice of the Peace. Culdwell v. Beatty, 365.

8. Same, a question of law: The question whether a certain accouut is over
the jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace is a question of law to be de-
cided by the Court, the amount of the account being a question of fact
for the jury to decide. Ibid.

4. Finding fact, not a matter of review: The Aluding of certain facts by a
Justice of the Peace, on the trial of an action in which the recovery is
for less than $25, is final, and not the subject of review by the Judge or
the Superior Court. Cauble v. Boyden, 434,

5. Jurisdiction, how proven: The jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace when necessary to be proven, being a question of law, cannot be proved by witnesses (if properly objected to), but must be determined by the Court. Bridgers v. Bridgers, 451.

6. Jurisdiction, when sufficiently averred: The jurisdiction of the Justice of the Peace of the complaint upon the examination whereof the alleged perjury was committed, is sufficiently averred where it is in this case, that the Justice had power to administer the oath. State v. Davis, 495. 7. Jurisdiction, parties, &c.: A judgmennt is rendered on a note against the maker, B, a citizen of Cumberland, in favor of the payee, A, a citizen of Lenoir; the judgment is assigned, and after its assignment, C, also a citizen of Lenoir, writes his name across the back of the note. In a suit by the assignee against. B and C on the judgment: Held that B and C were improperly joined in the action: Held further, that if C's name had been stricken from the process, the Justice had no jurisdiction. Wooten v. Maultsby, 462.

SHE JUDGMENT, 2.

JURISDICTION.

SEE JUDGMENT, 2.

KILLING LIVE STOCK.

SEE INDICTMent, 1.

LANDS DEVISED.

SEE WILLS, 3.

LARCENY.

SEE INDICTMENT, 3, 4.

LEGISLATURE.

SEE FERRIES, 4.

LIEN.

1. Judgment, when: By virtue of the C. C. P., sec. 254, (Battle's Revisal, chap. 17, sec. 254,) a judgment from the time it is docketed has a lien on all the interest of whatever kind the defendant has in real estate, whether it be such as can be seized under an execution or not. Hoppock, Glenn & Co. v. Shober, 158.

2. Debts to U. S. Government, lien when: The United States Government has an undoubted right to priority of payment in case of a general conveyance of his property by an insolvent, but that right is subject to a prior lien, and if a lien be acqnired by a docket judgment it will not be defeated by a subsequent assignment, unless the insolvent be thrown into bankrupety by proceedings commenced within four months thereafter,