
    THE STATE v. FINN, Appellant.
    Division Two,
    October 27, 1902.
    ÜTo Bill of Exceptions. If no bill of exceptions is filed on appeal from a conviction of a felony, and tbere is no error in tie record proper, tbe judgment will be affirmed.
    Appeal from Lawrence Circuit Court. — How. H. G. Pepper, Judge.
    AFFIRMED.
    
      Fielding P. Sizer for appellant.
    
      Edward G. Crow, Attorney-G-eneral, and Sam B. ■Jeffries, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
    In this case, we have nothing but the record proper. It is true, a purported bill of exceptions was filed, but it does not bear the signature of the judge. Indeed, if the bill was properly executed, it would be of no avail to defendant, as no exceptions were saved to the giving and refusing of instructions, nor to the action of the court in overruling the motion for a new trial. Nor is there anything to show the purported bill of exceptions. to have" been filed within the time allowed. State v. Berry, 103 Mo. 367; State v. Wilson, 44 Mo. App. 136; State v. Anderson, 115 Mo. 470; State v. Mosley, 116 Mo. 545. An unsigned bill of exceptions presents nothing for review. State v. Jones, 58 Mo. 506. Exceptions to the ruling of the court upon the motion for a new trial must be preserved in the bill of exceptions. State v. Griffin, 98 Mo. 672; State v. Harms, 95 Mo. 167. The motion in arrest has no place in the record proper. It. should be copied in the bill of exceptions. State v. Jan-son,80 Mo. 97; State v. Gilmore, 101 Mo. 1.
   BURGESS, J.

This appeal is prosecuted by defendant Finn from a conviction in the circuit court of Lawrence county, for felonious assault upon one John Musgroven wherein his punishment was fixed at two years imprisonment in the State penitentiary.

No bill of exceptions was filed in this cause, hence, there is nothing before us for review save and except the record proper, and as that seems to be free from error we can but affirm the judgment. It is so ordered.

All concur.  