
    (47 South. 539.)
    No. 17,334.
    STATE v. HOLLIDAY et al. In re HOLLIDAY et al.
    (Nov. 4, 1908.)
    State v. Banta Followed.
    The judgment in this case is based upon the reasons assigned in the case of State v. Ban-ta (this day decided) 47 South. 538, ante, p. 235.
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    P. W. Holliday and others were indicted for crime. On order of the judge refusing to recuse himself, they apply for writs of certiorari and prohibition.
    Order reversed, and case remanded.
    Walter Lemann, John Howell Pugh, and Edward Nicholls Pugh, for relators. Respondent Judge pro se.
   MONROE, J.

The question presented in this ease is the same as that this day decided in the case of State v. Banta (No. 17,333) 47 South. 538, ante, p. 235.

For the reasons assigned in that case, therefore, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment herein complained of, whereby the respondent judge overruled the' motion for his recusation, be avoided and reversed, and that this case be remanded, to be proceeded with according to law and to the views expressed in the opinion mentioned.  