INDEX.

INDEX.

ACCOMPLICE.

TESTIMONY OF, MUST BE CORROBORATED, and corroboration not sufficient when. See State v. Odell, 30.

ACTIONS.

FOR BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE, complaint in when sufficient, and plaintiff entitled to recover when. See Lahey v. Knott, 198. COMMENCED IN WRONG COUNTY, but removed to proper county before answer, effect of. See Weiss v. Bethel, 522.

ADMINISTRATION.

See ESTATES OF DECEASED PERSONS,

ADMINISTRATORS.

See EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.

AFFIDAVITS.

OF SURETIES ON APPEAL, when to be filed. See State v. McKinmore, 207. FOR ATTACHMENT, ultimate facts only to be stated in. See Crawford v. Roberts, 324.

IN PROCEEDING FOR CONTEMPT, merely evidence and not a pleading. See State v. McKinnon, 487.

TO EXPLAIN PLEADINGS, inadmissible. See Cauthorn v. King, 138.

AGREEMENTS.
See CONTRACTS,

ANTE-NUPTIAL AGREEMENT,

AFFECTING PROPERTY OF DECEDENT must be proved before county court, when. See Winkle v. Winkle, 193.

APPEAL,

1. BILL OF EXCEPTIONS-JUDGE MUST SIGN.-A statement containing the testimony given and the rulings of the circuit court excepted to on the trial, although certified to be correct by the attorneys of both parties, does not become a bill of exceptions unless signed by the judge, and can not be considered as such on an appeal to the supreme court. Singer Mfg. Co. v. Graham, 17.

2. RECALLING EXECUTION AFTER.—When an appeal has been taken from a
judgment and undertaking given for a stay of proceedings, an execution
issued thereon may be recalled and set aside by the circuit court on mo-
tion. Bentley v. Jones, 47.

3. EVIDENCE NOT PRODUCED IN LOWER COURT.-No paper or other evidence
not produced at the hearing of the motion in the circuit court can be
considered by the appellate court. Id.

4. MOTION TO PERFECT, WHEN FILED.-A motion to perfect an appeal by
filing a new undertaking must be filed before a motion to dismiss the ap-
peal is brought on for hearing. State v. McKinmore, 207.

5. AFFIDAVITS OF SURETIES ON-WHEN FILED.-Affidavits showing the
qualifications of sureties to an undertaking must be filed contempora-
neously with the undertaking. Id.

6. AMOUNT OF UNDERTAKING ON.-An undertaking on appeal must not be
limited in amount. Id.

7. BILL OF EXCEPTIONS-WHEN SILENT, WHAT PRESUMPTIONS ARISE.-
Where a bill of exceptions is silent as to whether certain instructions
were given which are necessary to sustain the judgment, it must be pre-
sumed that they were given, and especially where it appears that other
instructions were given which are not specifically set out therein.
State v. Ducker, 394.

8. THE DISMISSAL OF AN APPEAL by order of the appellate court, for defects
in the undertaking of appeal itself, does not operate as an affirmance of
the judgment appealed from. State v. McKinnon, 485.

9. NOTICE OF ERROR NOT ASSIGNED. -No error not specifically assigned in
the notice of appeal will be considered; but the court will take judicial
notice of the lack of jurisdiction in the court below, appearing on the
face of the record. Id. 487.

10. IDEM.-A statement in the notice that "the decision and judgment are
against law," is not specific under the statute, and should be disre
garded. Id.

11. THE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF, must precede the filing of the undertaking
therefor, and simply refiling the undertaking, after the notice of appeal
has been served, will not answer. Weiss v. Jackson Co., 529.
DECISION IN PROCEEDING FOR CONTEMPT not disturbed on except for
errors of law, or want of jurisdiction appearing in the transcript. See
State v. McKinnon, 487.

FROM JUSTICE'S COURT ALLOWING REPLY to be filed on, is not error, when.
See Rohr v. Isaacs, 451.

JUDGMENT REVERSED ON, WHERE COUNSEL PERMITTED TO ASSUME facts on
the argument, which were not proved, when. See Tenny v. Mulvaney,

513.

REFUSAL OF NEW TRIAL not reviewable on, when. See Hallock v. City of
Portland, 29.

RULING ON CHALLENGE OF JUROR not reviewed on, when. See Hayden v.
Long, 244.

ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION.

1. WRIT OF REVIEW TO CORRECT.-A writ of review may be prosecuted to
review the orders made by the board of equalization of a county correct-

ing the assessment of an individual taxpayer. Poppleton v. Yamhill Co.,
337.

2. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION-INCREASING ASSESSMENTS.-Said board of
equalization has power to raise the assessment of a taxpayer, by adding
to his assessment property owned by him, which was not found or in-
cluded in his assessment by the assessor. Id.

3. FRAUDULENT LOANS TO AVOID TAXATION.—If a taxpayer, having a large
amount of notes and mortgages, in order to escape the payment of taxes
on the same, borrows a sum of money of a person residing out of the
county, and deposits with his creditor such notes and mortgages, for the
purpose of avoiding the payment of taxes on the same, such notes are
taxable in the county where such taxpayer resides; and such deposit on
transfer is a fraud on the revenue of the county. And it is competent
for the board of equalization to try this question of fraud. Id.

4. NOTES AND MORTGAGES TAXABLE. -Notes and mortgages are property
which is subject to taxation. Id.

ASSIGNMENTS.

1. FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREDITORS-BURDEN OF PROOF. A debtor may
make an assignment of his property in trust with a provision that it be
converted into money, and the proceeds thereof distributed equally
among his creditors, excepting such as may be secured by mortgage, and
when such assignment is attached for fraud and illegality by a creditor,
the onus is upon him to establish the fraud and illegality by proof, and in
order to defeat it on that ground, it must be shown that the assignor and
assignee both participated in the fraud. Kruse v. Prindle, 158.
2. ASSIGNMENT ACT OF 1878-ATTACHMENT DISCHARGED--INTERPLEADER.—
Where the holder of a promissory note commenced an action on it
against the maker, and attached his property, and afterwards the de-
fendant assigned his property under the provisions of the assignment law
of October 18, 1878, for the benefit of all his creditors, and the assignee,
before judgment was obtained, filed a motion in the court for leave to in-
terplead, in order to have the attachment dissolved, and the court denied
such motion: Held, That under the code, the assignee was not authorized
to interplead, and that it was not error in the court to deny the motion.
Held, further, That in such case the attachment was discharged at the
date of the assignment, by force of the assignment itself. Tichenor v.
Coggins, 270.

See COMPOSITION AGREEMENT.

ATTACHMENT.

AFFIDAVIT FOR-ULTIMATE FACTS ONLY TO BE STATED.-Under the act of
1876, an affidavit for an attachment need not state the probative facts
out of which the indebtedness of defendant arose, but it is sufficient if
the ultimate facts required by the statute be shown as the basis of the
writ. Crawford v. Roberts, 324.

DISCHARGED BY ASSIGNMENT under assignment act of 1878, when. See
Tichenor v.
Coggins, 270.

BALLOT.

ON COLORED PAPER illegal. See State v. McKinnon, 493.