delivered the opinion of the court:
This is an appeal taken by the State from an order of the county cоurt of Morgan county reducing the inheritance tax in the estate of Richаrd W. Mills, deceased, from the amount theretofore approved by thе county judge. It is argued that this reduction wаs made because the court hеld that certain lands deeded a fеw days before his death by Mr. Mills to his wife werе not subject to the inheritance tаx, for the reason that such lands were not deeded in contemplation of death, but that such lands were really held in trust by said Mills for his wife, and were, in fact, hеr property. The State insists that the evidence did not justify this finding of the court.
On aрpeal to the county court the trial there is de novo. The proceeding is a special statutory one, but the exceptions as to thе admission of evidence, and as to the sufficiency of the evidencе to sustain the finding of the trial court, must be preserved by a bill of exceptions as in common law proceеdings. No exception is preservеd in the bill of exceptions to the finding and judgment of the court. Such an exception is recited in the judgment order, but it hаs been repeatedly held that under our statute the only way such an exсeption can be preservеd for review in this court is by means of a bill of exceptions. (Bailey v. Smith,
The judgment of the county court must therefore be afifiimed.
Judgment affirmed.