involves inquiry in Alabama

1974In People v. Morrison, 194 N.Y. 175 , 86 N.E. 1120 , 128 Am.St.Rep. 552 (1909), the defendant was charged with larceny of some clams and oysters from a staked area of Jamaica Bay.

1974In People v. Morrison, 194 N.Y. 175 , 86 N.E. 1120 , 128 Am.St.Rep. 552 (1909), the defendant was charged with larceny of some clams and oysters from a staked area of Jamaica Bay.

1970In fact, the Supreme Court, in defining the term “abandonment” had this to say: “Right to relief is premised upon the theory of a desertion or abandonment by the wife subsequent to the procurement of her divorce a mensa et thoro and then her later refusal of a proffered reconciliation. ifc í}; >¡í “ * * * Abandonment, in such legal sense, imports a willful desertion by one party of the other and involves a violation of marital duty by the abandoning spouse. * * * ijí íJí ‡ 9)c j|c “This holding, however, is not to indicate that a divorce a mensa et thoro will bar the deserting spouse from a ri

1970In fact, the Supreme Court, in defining the term “abandonment” had this to say: “Right to relief is premised upon the theory of a desertion or abandonment by the wife subsequent to the procurement of her divorce a mensa et thoro and then her later refusal of a proffered reconciliation. ifc í}; >¡í “ * * * Abandonment, in such legal sense, imports a willful desertion by one party of the other and involves a violation of marital duty by the abandoning spouse. * * * ijí íJí ‡ 9)c j|c “This holding, however, is not to indicate that a divorce a mensa et thoro will bar the deserting spouse from a ri

1952It is said in McKinstry v. City of Tuscaloosa, 172 Ala. 344 , 54 So. 629, 631 , that “The rule is that the testimony of an idiot or a lunatic may be received ‘if he appears to have sufficient understanding to comprehend the obligation of an oath, -and to be able to give correct (not necessarily ore tenus) answers to questions put. ” This involves an inquiry, it is said, into his appearance and demeanor and the nature of his statements.

1952It is said in McKinstry v. City of Tuscaloosa, 172 Ala. 344 , 54 So. 629, 631 , that “The rule is that the testimony of an idiot or a lunatic may be received ‘if he appears to have sufficient understanding to comprehend the obligation of an oath, -and to be able to give correct (not necessarily ore tenus) answers to questions put. ” This involves an inquiry, it is said, into his appearance and demeanor and the nature of his statements.

1945That there .is no such violation under the circumstances here detailed is quite manifest. ■This is the logic of the law and seems to be the weight of authority. 25 A.L.R., Note, p. 1047; 61 A.L.R., Note, p. 1268; Williams v. Williams, 33 Ariz. 367 , 265 P. 87 , 61 A.L.R. 1264 ; Boger v. Boger, 86 W.

1945That there .is no such violation under the circumstances here detailed is quite manifest. ■This is the logic of the law and seems to be the weight of authority. 25 A.L.R., Note, p. 1047; 61 A.L.R., Note, p. 1268; Williams v. Williams, 33 Ariz. 367 , 265 P. 87 , 61 A.L.R. 1264 ; Boger v. Boger, 86 W.

1945That there .is no such violation under the circumstances here detailed is quite manifest. ■This is the logic of the law and seems to be the weight of authority. 25 A.L.R., Note, p. 1047; 61 A.L.R., Note, p. 1268; Williams v. Williams, 33 Ariz. 367 , 265 P. 87 , 61 A.L.R. 1264 ; Boger v. Boger, 86 W.

1884This 'is a duty cast on him, which he alone can perforin, and suitors who may be required to give such bonds, have the clear legal right to demand its exercise. — Gulick v. New, 14 Ind. 93 ; Moses on Mandamus, 61.

1884If the former, the two offenses should have been charged in different counts, and the only right of the accused would have been to compel an election by the State of the count on which a conviction would be sought. — Bass v. The State, 63 Ala. 108 ; Wooster v. The State, 55 Ala. 217 ; Burgess v. The State, 44 Ala. 190 . ¥e do not doubt that, under the charge in its present form, averring an injury to t/wo mules, a conviction could be had for an injury to one only ; the rule being, that allegations as to the extent of the property, which is the subject of the offense, are divisible, and that a

1884If the former, the two offenses should have been charged in different counts, and the only right of the accused would have been to compel an election by the State of the count on which a conviction would be sought. — Bass v. The State, 63 Ala. 108 ; Wooster v. The State, 55 Ala. 217 ; Burgess v. The State, 44 Ala. 190 . ¥e do not doubt that, under the charge in its present form, averring an injury to t/wo mules, a conviction could be had for an injury to one only ; the rule being, that allegations as to the extent of the property, which is the subject of the offense, are divisible, and that a

1884If the former, the two offenses should have been charged in different counts, and the only right of the accused would have been to compel an election by the State of the count on which a conviction would be sought. — Bass v. The State, 63 Ala. 108 ; Wooster v. The State, 55 Ala. 217 ; Burgess v. The State, 44 Ala. 190 . ¥e do not doubt that, under the charge in its present form, averring an injury to t/wo mules, a conviction could be had for an injury to one only ; the rule being, that allegations as to the extent of the property, which is the subject of the offense, are divisible, and that a

1845It has been decided that the assent of creditors will be presumed when the assignment is for their benefit. [Brooks v. Manbury, 11 Wheat. 78 ; Tompkins v. Wheeler, 16 Peter’s, 139.] But, conceding this as the general rule, it is insisted that this presumption only arises when the deed is absolute and unconditional; and that it is repelled whenever the conditions imposed are otherwise, or an obligation is cast on the creditor to do or omit any thing whatever.