
    39977.
    WHEAT v. FRAKER.
    Decided February 7, 1963.
    
      J. Paxson Amis, for plaintiff in error.
    
      McCamy, Minor & Vining, John T. Minor, III, contra.
   Eberhardt, Judge:

“Foul, foul play,” the defendant cried;
“That I by kinsman be not trammelled,
Let the issue again be tried
Before another jury impanelled.
Remember how from John at Runnymede
The Charta was forced and wrested
That no matter what the issue or the deed
By my peers it must be tried and tested. With juror mine adversary durst
Try the cause, whose wife is second cousin to my wife And to plaintiff’s wife a first.
A new trial, sire, I demand to settle strife.”
“No foul play do I find or see,”
The judge replied. “Foreman’s wife to thine And to plaintiff’s wife may kinsman be,
But to Doug and thee no kinship do I find.
Thus, it doth not appear
For any cause or reason told
That the juror was not thy peer
The case to try and verdict mold.
Moreover, when kinships we sought to learn
It doth not appear that as best befits
One who would a kinsman spurn
Thou revealedst that ‘cousin’ did on the panel sit.
Thy day in court thou hast had,”
The judge asserted, “and law commands That, no error made., whether good or bad,
The issued tried and settled stands.”

Judgment affirmed.

Felton, C. J., and Bussell, J., concur. 
      
      “The groom and bride each comes within
      The circle of the other’s kin;
      But kiii and kin are still no more
      Related than they were before.”
      
        Central R. & Bkg. Co. v. Roberts, 91 Ga. 513, 517 (18 SE 315); Garrett v. State, 203 Ga. 756, 768 (5) (48 SE2d 377); and see Everett v. Culberson, 215 Ga. 577 (8) (111 SE2d 367); Smith v. State, 2 Ga. App. 574 (59 SE 311).
     
      
      See Jennings v. Autry, 94 Ga. App. 344 (5) (94 SE2d 629); Joyner v. State, 208 Ga. 435 (2) (67 SE2d 221).
     