
    McAlister vs. The State of Georgia.
    1. Where a ground of a motion for new trial, based on the admission of evidence, was not verified, and the record does not show that the evidence was objected to, the ruling thereon cannot be considered by this court.
    2. There was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict, and the presiding judge being satisfied, this court will not interfere.
    3. Where it was in issue whether the defendant discharged a gun at another with the intent to kill, or whether the gun was discharged accidentally, and the court in his charge instructed the jury several times that, in order to convict the accused, they must be satisfied that he shot at the prosecutor with intent to kill and murder him, and also that, to convict, if the killing had taken place, it must have been murder, and gave fully in charge the law of murder, malice, reasonable doubts, etc., if the charge was not as full as the accused thought it ought to have been, he should have requested a further charge; especially as the jury might have acquitted him under the charge given on his own theory of the defence.
    Judgment affirmed.
    January 21, 1885.
   Blandford, Justice.  