
    Waldrip, warden, v. Slagle.
    
      No. 5128.
    December 19, 1925.
    Appeal and Error 4 O. J. pp. 416, n. 86; 532, n. 90.
   Hines, J.

The bill of exceptions in this case recites that upon the hearing in the court below certain oral and documentary evidence was introduced by the parties, and that a true and correct brief of 'said evidence is attached to and made a part of the bill of exceptions as exhibit A thereto. This exhibit follows the certificate to the bill of exceptions, and is not identified by the signature of the judge; and this was not a correct mode of bringing the evidence to this court. Colquitt v. Solomon, 61 Ga. 492; Roberts v. Cairo, 133 Ga. 642 (66 S. E. 938); Rushing v. DeLoach, 149 Ga. 483 (100 S. E. 571). Where the bill of exceptions shows on its face that the evidence material to a consideration of the errors assigned is not before this court in such a manner that it can be considered, and the questions raised by the assignments of error necessarily involve a consideration of the evidence, this court can not adjudicate that any error was committed, or that there should be a judgment of reversal. Roberts v. Cairo, supra; Caldwell v. Sturdivant, 155 Ga. 590 (118 S. E. 39).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Habeas corpus. Before Judge J. B. Jones. Hall superior court. September 19, 1925.

G. C. Pittman, for plaintiffs in error.

J. M. Lang, contra.  