This is the second appeal in this case. Harper v. State,13 Ala. App. 47" date_filed="1915-06-01" court="Ala. Ct. App." case_name="Harper v. State">13 Ala. App. 47, 69 So. 302" date_filed="1915-06-01" court="Ala. Ct. App." case_name="Harper v. State">69 So. 302. The only matters urged in brief of the appellant by his able counsel are the refusal of charge 6 and the denial of the motion for new trial.
Charge 6, though literally quoted from the opinion of the court in Shell v. State, 88 Ala. 17, 7 So. 40, is argumentative and was properly refused. Newsom v. State,15 Ala. App. 43" date_filed="1916-05-20" court="Ala. Ct. App." case_name="Newsom v. State">15 Ala. App. 43, 72 So. 579" date_filed="1916-05-20" court="Ala. Ct. App." case_name="Newsom v. State">72 So. 579; Pope v. State, 174 Ala. 63" date_filed="1911-12-21" court="Ala." case_name="Pope v. State">174 Ala. 63,57 So. 245" date_filed="1911-12-21" court="Ala." case_name="Pope v. State">57 So. 245.
The testimony of the jurors, on grounds of public policy, was not admissible to impeach the verdict; and the objection to the testimony offered to show misconduct on the part of one of the jurors was properly sustained. Montgomery v. State, 133 Ala. 508" date_filed="1901-11-15" court="Ala." case_name="Montgomery Street Railway Co. v. Mason">133 Ala. 508,32 So. 261; Eufaula v. Speight, 121 Ala. 613" date_filed="1898-11-15" court="Ala." case_name="City of Eufaula v. Speight">121 Ala. 613. 25 So. 1009.
We find no error in the proceedings of the court, and the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.