Grimе, incest. Indictment, usual form. Venue, Pulaski county.- Trial, with evidence pro and con. Punishment, two years in the penitentiary. These are the salient features of this salaciоus record.
1. Evidence was admitted on behalf of the State showing that in June, 1894, Hugh Crisman saw defendant and his half-sister, Laura Pruett, on the bed in their father’s house, and in such a position that indicated that they were indulging in sexual intercourse. After this the witness was allowed to testify over the objections оf defendant that subsequent to the time that he saw Laura Pruеtt on the bed with defendant, that is, along the latter part оf June or
2. Error alsо occurred in refusing defendant permission to ask Crisman whеther he had not “threatened to kill defendant or run him off: the place.” This question was clearly competent since it is always competent to show by such an interrоgatory that the witness has a bias against or hostile feеling toward a party litigant, and if the witness deny such feeling, etc., he may be contradicted, because it is always imрortant and all important to show that the witness does not stand indifferent between the contending parties. Whart. Crim. Ev. [9 Ed.], sеcs. 485, 376; 3 Rice Ev., p. 342; Roscoe’s Dig. Crim. Ev. [11 Ed.]r p. 97; 1 Greenl. Ev. [14 Ed.], sec. 450.
A similar quеstion to that asked Crisman was asked Lyman Rigby in reference to his having “told defendant that he (Rigby) killed defendant’s hogs.” This question was calculated to develop what were the feelings which Rigby entertained toward defendant and should have been answered for reasons already given.
3. Finally, error occurred in permitting the State, despite objection of defendant, to introduce evidencе of the acts and words of Charles Pruett, the father of the indicted parties, to wit, that on one
We hold thаt errors such as we have noted should cause a reversal of the judgment and remanding of the cause, and it is so ordered.