
    Rawlins et ux. v. Tucker.
    Where it does not appear from the record, that the giving or refusing to give, .instructions, was objected to, at the time, the appellate court will not pass ■ upon their correctness.
    A party cannot be permitted to stand by and allow instructions to be given or refused, wait the result of the verdict, and then, for the first time, except to the action of the court in relation to the instructions.
    
      Appeal from the Appanoose District Court.
    
    This was an action on the casé, -for slanderous words spoken. The errors assigned, relate to certain instructions, given and refused by the court. It does not appear that at the time of giving and refusing the said instructions, that any objections were made. After verdict, there was a motion by defendant for a new trial, for the reason that the court erred in giving .and refusing the said instructions. This motion was overruled, and judgment on the verdict. Defendant appeals.
    
      Palmer & Trimble, for the appellant.
    
      Knapp & Caldwell, for the appellee.
   Weight, C. J.

If these instructions were properly before us, we should incline to the opinion, that they were not in all respects, as given, correct. We have too frequently held, however, that we cannot notice instructions that come before us as these do, to depart from the rule, whatever the circumstances. Objections must be made at the time they are given or refused, and the record so show, or-this court will not undertake to pass upon their correctness. It would not do to permit a party to stand by, and allow instructions to be given or refused, without objection, wait until he sees the result of the verdict, and then for the first time except. The reason of the rule is, that the mind of the court, shall at the time, be called to the objectionable matter, and there have an opportunity to correct it.

Judgment affirmed.  