
    The City of Topeka v. E. D. Myers.
    
      Motion for Rehearing. ,
    
    Prosecution for a violation of a certain prohibitory liquor ordinance of The City of Topeka. From a conviction at the April Term, 1884, of the district court of Shawnee county, the defendant Myers appealed. The supreme court reversed the case on account of the misconduct of the prosecuting attorney in using the following words in addressing the jury: “If the defendant is not guilty, why did he not take the stand? He could have easily proven that he did not keep the place.” {City of Topeka v. Myers, 34 Kas. 501.) The City filed a motion for a rehearing, which was decided at the July, 1885, session of the court.
   Per Curiam:

The evidence produced .upon the motion for a rehearing is painfully conflicting as to what actually occurred upon the trial in the court below with respect to the conduct of the counsel for appellee; but it is not necessary to determine what is proved or disproved as to those matters. The only question before us is, whether the bill of exceptions embraced in the record has been changed since it was allowed and signed by the district court. The evidence does not establish that any change therein has been made. Under these circumstances, the motion for a rehearing must be overruled.  