OPINION.

LORE, C. J.-If this were allowed, all a juror would have to do if he wanted to have a verdict set aside would be to say to somebody else that it was found irregularly. It would put the verdict of a jury entirely in the hands of one juror.

Thompson and Mirriam on Juries, Sec. 445, p. 547.

Statements made to witnesses by jurors are not received in

evidence.

We decline to hear this witness upon that point.

James H. Speakman, a witness, was questioned by Mr. White as follows:

Q. Do you know Enoch C. Truitt? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you see him on the first or eighth of April of this year? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you have any conversation in his presence in relation to the Nehemiah Harmon matter? A. Yes, sir.

Q. State what he said to you and give the whole conversation. A. Several times persons have asked me what I thought of the murder case don't know whether it was Monday or Tuesday of last week-anyhow they asked me about this murder case. I told them that if the evidence was like it was at the Coroner's inquest I did not see why they should not find him guilty.

Q. Who was present? A. A dozen or more.

Q. Was Enoch C. Truitt present? A. Yes, sir; but Enoch C. Truitt said nothing; and I can't say who was present by name, because then I did not know even the jurors' names.

By CHIEF JUSTICE LORE:

Q. He did not make any statement? A. No, sir; I would not say that he did.

EVIDENCE-OPINION.

By JUDGE SPRUANCE:

Q. Neither then nor at any other time before this trial? A. No, sir; not to me.

Q. Or in your presence? A. No, sir.

Mr. White:-That is all of our testimony. We will close here.

Mr. Ward:-Does the Court desire our affidavits to be filed?
LORE, C. J.:-No.

(After argument by the respective counsel, the Court rendered the following opinion and decision) :

LORE, C. J.:-The Court have considered this motion for a new trial and the evidence offered in support thereof. Proof as to improper conduct on the part of the jury, or any of them, having entirely failed, the Court were left to the consideration of whether the verdict was clearly and manifestly against the law and the evidence, under the rules and practice of this Court. After carefully considering it, we do not think that that is so cleary shown that we could depart from the well established rule governing the Court in this case, and we are therefore compelled to refuse the motion for a new trial.

SYLLABUS-CASE STATED.

HORACE G. RETTEW, RECEIVER OF TAXES and COUNTY TREASurer for New CASTLE COUNTY, STATE OF DELAWARE, vs. ST. PATRICK'S ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, WILMINGTON, DELAWARE, a corporation of the State of Delaware.

HORACE G. RETTEW, RECEIVER OF TAXES and COUNTY TREASURER FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY, STATE OF Delaware, vs. ST. JOSEPH'S SOCIETY FOR COLORED MISSIONS OF WILMINGTON, a corporation of the State of Delaware.

Case Stated-Taxation-Real Propetry used for School PurposesExemption-Constitution-Statute.

Real property used for school purposes, where the tuition is free, comes within the Constitutional exemption (Section 3, Article 10, Constitution of 1897,) and is therefore exempt from taxation.

(July 3, 1902.)

LORE, C. J., and PENNWILL and BOYCE, J. J., sitting.

Henry C. Conrad for plaintiff.

William Michael Byrne and John F. Malloy for defendants.

Superior Court, New Castle County, May Term, 1902.

AMICABLE ACTION. CASES STATED (Nos. 134 and. 139, respectively, to February Term, 1902).

CASE STATED IN NO. 134.

"And now, to wit, this tenth day of March, A. D. 1902, it is agreed between the attorneys for the respective parties above named, as follows, to wit:

That Horace G. Rettew, the plaintiff above named, is the Receiver of Taxes and County Treasurer for New Castle County,

CASE STATED.

State of Delaware, and as such seeks in this suit to collect taxes on certain property belonging to the defendant above named;

That the said St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Church, Wilmington, Delaware, is a corporation existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware;

That the said corporation, in the exercise of its corporate franchises, is engaged in religious, educational and philanthropic work;

That the said corporation, in the exercise of its corporate franchises, has established and maintains a school in the city of Wilmington, New Castle County and State of Delaware, where tuition is free;

That the said corporation, for carrying out its plan of education where tuition is free as aforesaid, has constructed for school purposes a building on the north side of Fourteenth street, between King and French streets, known as Nos. 101-107 East Fourteenth street, in the said city of Wilmington;

That in the said school are taught reading, writing, arithmetic, mathematics, geography, history and other branches of secular education;

That the said school is maintained wholly by voluntary contributions made to the said corporation, and that there is no tuition fee charged to any pupil in said school;

That the said corporation through its officers has concluded that the best results in the education of children may be obtained by combining religious instruction with educational training;

That the said corporation, for the accomplishment of this plan of instruction, combining religious and educational training, employs as teachers in said school persons particularly identified with the religion taught by the said corporation ;

That the teachers so employed by the said corporation are persons who live according to certain rules and regulations which require them to live together in community life, and do not permit them to board separately in different houses;

CASE STATED.

That to secure the services of these teachers and for the accomplishment of its school purposes, the said corporation owns certain real property, known as No. 1411 French street, Wilmington, Delaware, on which is a house where the said teachers live, adjoining its said school property, and used in connection therewith in its plan of free education;

That the said corporation uses the said premises, No. 1411 French street, solely as a residence for its teachers employed in its school as aforesaid, and for no other purposes;

That the said corporation receives no rent for the said premises. from the said teachers, nor any revenue for the same of any kind whatsoever;

That the said corporation pays the said teachers a small stipend for their services and furnishes them a residence, at No. 1411 French street, aforesaid, free, in consideration of their labors as teachers in its free school as aforesaid :

If by reason of the premises, the Court should be of the opinion that the said real property, No. 1411 French street, is subject to taxation for county purposes, then judgment shall be given for the plaintiff for the sum of twelve and sixty one-hundredths dollars and costs; but if the Court should be of the opinion that the said premises are not subject to taxation for county purposes, then judgment shall be given for defendant for costs."

CASE STATED IN No. 139.

"And now, to wit, this 13th day of June, A. D., 1902, it is agreed between the attorneys for the respective parties above named as follows, to wit:

That Horace G. Rettew, the plaintiff above named, is the Receiver of Taxes and County Treasurer for New Castle County, State of Delaware, and, as such, seeks in this suit to collect the sum of One Hundred and Twenty-six Dollars and Forty-one Cents ($126.41) for County and Poor Taxes for 1901, on the following described property belonging to the defendant above named, to wit: