
    The State v. Miller and Kremling.
    1. Criminal Law: evidence: credit to be given testimony. The testimony of a witness whose reputation for truth, is shown to be bad is not necessarily to be entirely disregarded, but should be considered under all the circumstances, and in connection with the other evidence, and given the weight to which the jury believe it entitled. The State v. Miller and Kremling, ants, pp. 84 ánd 154, followed.
    
      Appeal from Liar din District Court.
    
    Friday, March 19.
    On the lltli day of November, 1876, the defendants were indicted for the crime of nuisance, committed by continuing and using a building for the sale of intoxicating liquors. At the May term, 1877, the defendants were tried and convicted. At the November term, 1877, each defendant was fined $120, and costs. The defendants appeal.
    
      Fred. Gilman, for the appellants.
    
      J. F. MeJimkin, Attorney General, for the State.
   Day, J.

I. Upon the trial, one of the witnesses for the State was permitted to look at the minutes of his testimony before the grand jury, for the purpose of refreshing his memory. This action of the court is assigned as error.

A witness, for the purpose of refreshing and assisting his memory, may use a written instrument or memorandum, though not made by himself, provided, after inspecting it, he can speak to the facts from his own recollection. 1 Green-leaf on Evidence, section 436. There was no error in permitting the witness to look at the minutes of his evidence for the purpose above indicated.

II. The defendants object to the 10th instruction of the court. This instruction is, in substance, that where it is shown that the reputation for truth of a witness ., . .-it is bad, ms evidence is not necessarily destroyed, 7# J J 7 but it is to be considered under all the circumstances described in the evidence, and given such weight as the jury believe it entitled to, and to be disregarded if they believe it entitled to no- weight. The instruction, we think, announces a. correct view of law.

All of the other questions involved in this case have been determined adversely to the appellants in the case of the State against these same defendants, ande, 84 and 154.

Affirmed.  