
    Irby v. The State.
    Bleckley, C. J. — 1. The showing for a continuance not stating that the witness who was confined in the county jail was too unwell to appear and testify, there was no error in denying the continuance; the court, at the conclusion of the State’s evidence, offering to have the witness brought from the jail for the purpose of testifying in behalf of the accused, and the offer being declined.
    2. Before admitting a confession in evidence, the presiding judge should see to it that the confession was made freely and voluntarily ; but where it affirmatively appears by the witness who heard the confession, that he held out no inducement and did nothing to excite either hope or fear and knew of nothing done by others to induce the confession, it is prima fade admissible, and the court, before admitting it, is not bound to hear evidence offered by the accused which might show coercion or the excitement of fear or hope as -inducement to confess. Such evidence, however, may afterwards he adduced to the jury, and it will be for them to determine, under all the evidence submitted, whether or not the confession was free and voluntary. Dawson v. The State, 59 Ga. 333.
    3. There being nothing in the evidence or in the prisoner’s statement tending to show that the confession admitted in evidence was influenced by reward or the hope thereof, a request to charge the jury that the confession should not be considered if the jury believed, from the evidence and the statement of the defendant taken together, that it was influenced by fear of injury or by reward or hope thereof, and that whether it was so induced was a fact for the jury to find, was properly denied. The language of the request was more comprehensive than the statement, whether taken with the evidence or without it, rendered pertinent or appropriate.
    4. There being nothing in the evidence touching the element of self-defense or any grade ,of homicide except murder, and no request having been made to charge the jury on self-defense, failure to charge on it was not error, although the prisoner’s statement may have presented the question, the court having charged on the statement in terms of the statute. ■ Darby v. The State, 79 Ga. 63; Underwood v. The State, 88 Ga. 47.
    October 8, 1894.
    Indictment for murder. Before Judge Milner. Bar-tow superior court. Januai-y terra, 1894.
    J. B. Conyers, T C. Milner aud J. W. Harris, Jr., for plaintiff in error. • J. M. Terrell, attorney-general, and A. W. Fite, solicitor-general, contra.
    
   Judgment affirmed.  