Have had any knowledge of these matters at the time of the purchase of the notes, and the testimony Is inadmissible In this case for any purpose.There are a number of other matters complained of, but, taking the disposition of those already decided herein, we do not think the errors will occur in another trial. The defendant is charged with perjury, and testimony tending to show whether he made the statement, and, if he made It, was it false, and facts showing the materiality of the statement ought to limit the bounds of the Investigation.The judgment is reversed, and the cause Is remanded.In a statutory rape case, an affidavit by a witness that another witness would testify that prosecutrix was over the age of consent affords no ground for a new trial for newly discovered evidence, where the second witness was not produced when the motion for new trial was heard, nor her affidavit attached to the record; the mere hearsay offidavit of the first witness not bringing it within the rule of newly discovered evidence.Appeal from District Court, Madison County; S. W. Dean, Judge.Albert Vaughn was convicted of rape The North Face Sale upon a girl underyears of age, and appeals. Affirmed.Toler & Wood and Randolph & Randolph, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Genfor the State.DAVIDSON, P. J. Appellant was convicted of rape upon a girl underyears of age; his punishment being assessed at five years confinement in the penitentiary The Indictment was attacked In a motion in arrest of judgment The indictment is in stereotyped form, such as has been held sufficient to charge the offense, and we deem it unnecessary to discuss its validity. . Appellant requested the court to instruct the jury to acquit, upon the theory that It was necessary to prove force under the allegation in the indictment that the defendant did then Cheap North Face and there ravish and have carnal knowledge of prosecutrix. This contention is not well taken. While in a certain way the allegation did ravish carries with it the idea of the element of force, North Face Coupons yet this character of indictment has been held sufficient to charge the offense on a girl underyears of age without requiring proof of force, or a charge upon the theory of force. . A bill of exception recites that Zadle Mason, the prosecutrix, testified that she was underyears of age at the time of the alleged rape, and further stated that such knowledge was based upon Information received from her mother. Objection was urged to this on the ground that it was hearsay. This character of evidence does not come within the doctrine of hearsay. Age, pedigree, and matters of that sort are provable in the manner indicated in the bill of exceptions. . Another bill was reserved, to the testimony of Mrs. Mason, mother of the alleged prosecutrix, who testified Nike Shoes Australia that her daughter, Zadle Mason, was underyears of age at the time of the alleged commission of the offense, but that she could not remember the year of the birth of her daughter, but that she had a record of Nike Australia her birth at home. Objection was urged to this testimony on the ground that it was secondary evidence, and that the record containing the date of the birth was the best evidence and should be offered. This bill is qualified as follows: The mother of the prosecutrix testified positively as to her daughters age, and gave tbe month and day of her birth, but could not give the year. She, however, testified that she had kept up with her age, adding one year on each birthday, and knew her nge. She did not testify from the record she had, but from her own knowledge. North Face Coupon As this bill is qualified by the trial judge, we are of opinion same does not Moncler Outlet show error. . Appended to the motion for a new trial is the affidavit of Vernon Jones, who was a member of the jury trying appellant, who stated that he was for some time in favor of an acquittal, and would likely have remained in that condition of mind, had it not been for the fact that John T. Park, foreman, and other members, told him that the defendant could try for a new trial, and then have the right of appeal North Face Sale also, which he thought would