
    HUFFMAN v. THE STATE.
    Bleckley, C. J. — 1.An indictment under the code, 24577(a), for interrupting or disturbing a school, describes sufficiently the mode of interruption or disturbance, which charges that the offense was committed “ by cursing and quarreling and fighting and discharging a loaded pistol, and by boisterous conduct and by otherwise indecently acting ”; and under such indictment, evidence is admissible which tends to establish the charge.
    2. It is not cause for reversing the denial of a continuance that the movant made a legal showing as to the absence of one witness, it appearing bythe same showing, on cross-examination, that another witness was present by whom he could prove the facts to which the absent witness was expected to testify, and it not appearing that the discretion of the court was abused.
    
      3. Although putting one out of a house in which the exercises of a school are being conducted, for misbehavior, is not an arrest, yet where the misbehavior amounted to a penal offense, it was a verbal inaccuracy rather than a substantial error for the court to denominate the expulsion as an arrest and instruct the jury that a private person is legally empowered to arrest any one committing an offense in his presence.
    October 8,1894,
    Indictment for misdemeanor. Before Judge Brown. City court of Carroll county. August 10, 1894.
    Adamson & Jackson, for plaintiff in error.
    T. A. Atkinson, solicitor-general, and W. D. Hamrick, by H. M. Reid, contra.
    
   Judgment affirmed.  