tinuing, he says: "I looked and saw Sam Gilliam coming up towards the front wheel of the wagon on the opposite side from the fence. When he got about the center of the fore-wheel, I saw he had his pistol out in his right hand (indicating and pointing his hand toward the floor in front of him at an angle of about 40 or 45 degrees.)" Witness then turned his eyes toward Parks, who was standing at the hind end of the wagon, about the hind wheel next to the road, and he had his pistol pointed toward Gilliam, and the shooting instantly began. "I thought at the time Gilliam had shot, but he didn't."

Parks' statement is, that he saw Gilliam advancing on him, and just as he reached the front wheel of the wagon, "he threw his pistol on me, and I drew mine and fired as quick as I could. It was all done in an instant." He declared that he did not go into the road for a difficulty; that he had a man hired and had to go on with his work; that he shot Gilliam because he honestly believed he intended to kill him. He fired four shots, two of which took effect.

The plaintiff in error excepted to the giving of instructions 1, 2 and 3 on behalf of the Commonwealth; and also to the court's modification of his instructions 3, 5 and 7. The trend of all these instructions is, to qualify or abridge the right of self-defense upon which the accused relies as an excuse for the homicide, on the assumption that he, to some extent at least, was instrumental in bringing on the difficulty.

In view of the fact that the case is to be remanded for a new trial, we shall abstain from commenting on the evidence further than to remark, that we do not think it justifies an instruction founded on the theory that the accused provoked the difficulty.

For these reasons, the judgment complained of must be reversed, the verdict of the jury set aside, and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed.

PETITIONS FOR APPEALS, ETC.

Miller v. Roanoke National Bank. Circuit Court of Franklin County.

Appeal and sup. Bond, $300.

Copperthite v. Loudoun National Bank. Circuit Court of Loudoun County. Appeal and sup. Bond, $500. Van Name's Ex'or v. Louthan, et al. Circuit Court of City of Williamsburg and County of James City. Appeal and sup. No bond. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Christian's Admx. Circuit Court of City of Clifton Forge. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $10,000. McComb v. Gilkeson, &c. Circuit Court of Augusta County. Appeal and sup. Bond, $300.

Withers v. Commonwealth. Circuit Court of Bedford County. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $100.

Norfolk & Western Ry. Co. v. Board of Supervisors of Carroll County. Circuit Court of Carroll County. Appeal and sup. Bond, $1,000. Donothan v. Commonwealth. Circuit Court of Pulaski County. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $200.

Fentress v. Steele & Sons. Circuit Court of City of Norfolk.

of error and sup. Bond, $4,000.

Writ

N. & W. Ry. Co. v. Tidewater Ry. Co. Circuit Court of Norfolk County. Appeal and sup. Bond, $600.

Bond, $500.

Whitehead, et als v. Cape Charles R. Co. Circuit Court of Northamp-
ton County. Writ of error and sup.
Pilkerton et al. v. Roberson, by &c. Circuit Court of Wise County.
Writ of error and sup. Bond, $300.

Jennings v. Commonwealth. Circuit Court of Louisa County. Writ of error and sup. No bond.

Bijou Company v. Watson. Circuit Court of City of Norfolk. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $1,500.

Hoster-Columbus Asso. Breweries Co. v. Stag Hotel Corporation. Corporation Court of City of Norfolk. Writ of error refused.

Utterbach v. Morgan, Supt. Circuit Court of City of Richmond. Writ of error refused.

Newman v. Newman. Circuit Court of Orange County. Appeal refused.

Adams v. Cumdy. Corporation Court of City of Lynchburg. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $500.

Bedford City v. Sitwell. Circuit Court of Bedford County. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $1,200.

Wood, et als. v. Tredway. Circuit Court of Greensville County. Appeal and sup. Bond, $1,000.

Arents v. Casselman & Co. Circuit Court of Henrico County. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $1,200.

Coles v. Commonwealth. Corporation Court of City of Charlottesville. Writ of error refused.

Shelton et als v. Hodnett, et als. Circuit Court of Pittsylvania County. Appeal refused.

Johnston's Admr's. v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company. Circuit Court of Henrico County. Writ of error refused.

Jones, et als. v. Buckingham Slate Company, Inc. Circuit Court of Buckingham County. Writ of error refused.

Myers, Receiver, v. Commonwealth. Hustings Court of City of Richmond. Writ of error. Bond, $300.

Myers, Receiver, v. City of Richmond. Hustings Court of City of Richmond. Writ of error and sup. Bond, $750.

Carter v. Jeffries. Circuit Court of Prince William County. Appeal

and sup. Bond, $400.

Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Ccmmonwealth, at rel. &c. State Corporation Commission. Appeal refused.

Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Com'th, at rel. &c. State Corporation Commission. Appeal refused.

Southern Ry. Co. v. Com'th, at rel. &c. State Corporation Commission. Appeal refused.

Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Com'th at rel. &c. State Corporation Commission. Appeal refused.

Chesapeake & Western Ry. Co. v. Com'th at rel. &c.

Commission. Appeal refused.

State Corporation

Norfolk & Western Ry. Co. v. Com'th at rel. &c. State Corporation Commission. Appcal refused.

Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Cohn. Circuit Court of City of Richmond. Writ of error refused.

National Ins. Co. of Va., Inc., v. Marks. Circuit Court of City of
Lynchburg. Writ of error refused

Emmerton Canning Co. v. T. S. Southgate & Co. Court of Law &
Chancery of City of Norfolk. Writ of error refused.
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Rutherfoord's Ex'or.

Circuit Court

of Goochland County. Writ of error refused. Commonwealth v. McMillon. Circuit Court of Patrick County. Writ of error refused.

Whitman Agricultural Co. v. Crawford & Smith. Circuit Court of Augusta County. Writ of error refused.

Harper v. Gilliam. Circuit Court of Pulaski County. Appeal refused. Gleaves v. Rosser. Circuit Court of Prince Edward County. Writ

of error refused.

Jordan v. Smith, Oyster Inspector. Mandamus denied.

Russell Creek Coal & Coke Co. v. Russell Creek Coal Co. Circuit Court of Wise County. Writ of error refused.

Spencer v. Vetter. Circuit Court of Prince William County. Appeal refused.

M. B. WATTS, Box 868, Richmond, Va.

ACTIONS.

1. Right of parent to sue for loss or services of child, 478.
See EQUITY JURISDICTION, 12

ADMINISTRATORS.

1. Administrator is protected in making distributions under de-
cree of court, 3.

ADVERSE POSSESSION.

1. The possession of a grantor who remains in possession is that
of tenant of the grantee. What necessary to render it adverse,
78.

2. Possession through mistake as to boundaries is not adverse;
intention to hold adversely is an indispensable element of adverse
possession, 78.

3. No title by adverse possession can be acquired to land dedi-
cated and accepted as a public highway, 250.

4. It is not necessary to constitute adverse possession that there
shall be rightful title. If the instrument under which the claimant
enters upon the land is regular upon its face, it will suffice to give
color of title, and he is not ordinarily required to go beyond the
writing to see whether it actually passes title or is in fact void,
443.

5. A tax deed may give color of title, although informal and
defective, or even absolutely void, 443.

6. Where a tax deed is relied upon to give color of title, the statute
begins to run only from the date of possession under the deed, and
the power to issue the deed does not arise until after the expira-
tion of the period allowed for redemption, 443.

7. Where standing trees have been, by deed, created a separate
estate from the estate in the land, the possession of such trees
is not presumably in the owner or claimant in possession of the
surface, and his period of possession cannot be added to the posses-
sion of the owner of the trees to form the basis of a claim of
adverse possession, 443.

8. Where the contiguity of the original boundary of a senior
patent was severed before the acquisition of the title or color of
title under which a junior patentee or claimant claims, quoad the
junior claimant who does not connect his title with that of the
original patentee, there is no such contiguity of seisin with re-
spect to the dissevered tracts as would render actual possession
of one constructive possession of the other. 653.

See EVIDENCE, 1; JURY, 1.

AGENTS AND AGENCY.

1. Where a renewal of a lease was authorized by resolution of
a municipal council, upon certain terms, and the new lease con-
tained other terms, but was taken by lessee with knowledge of the
terms authorized, the lessee is bound by the authorized terms and
not by the terms employed in the renewal. 41.

See PRINCIPAL AND AGENT, 1.