Criminal Law—Burglary—Evidence—Incriminating Statements in English Language—Rebutting Opinion Evidence Disallowed— Discretion.—Where a defendant charged with burglary was a Russian, who was shown to have made incriminating statements in the English language, it is held not an abuse of discretion to disallow the opinion evidence of another Russian witness that the defendant could not speak the English language, where he is shown to have but little acquaintance with the defendant, and little means of observation as to his inability to speak in that language.

Id.—Competency of Opinion Evidence as to Language—Qualification of Witness—Question for Trial Court.—Though the opinion evidence of a witness as to the ability of another to speak a particular language may be competent on the score of means of knowledge, yet it is for the trial court, in the exercise of a sound discretion, to determine the qualification of such witness to be heard.

Id.—Testimony of Police Officer in Criminal Cases—Proper Exclusion.—It was proper to sustain an objection to a question asked of a peace officer as to the number of times he had been called upon to testify in criminal cases. His testimony in this case could not be affected by the fact that he had in other cases been called upon to testify as a witness.

Id.—Insufficient Impeachment of Witness—General Question.— • The court properly sustained an objection to a general question to a witness as to his knowledge of defendant’s honesty and) integrity, without purporting to show his reputation in the community in which he lived.

Id.—Proper Exclusion of Evidence to Show Want of Motive of Crime.—The court did not err in excluding evidence going to show a want of motive for the crime, charged, since the commission of the crime by the defendant was clearly established by positive evidence, and the motive of the crime therefore became unimportant.

Id.—Absence of Prejudicial Error or Miscarriage of Justice.—It is held that there was no prejudicial error in the giving or refusal of instructions, or in the statements or acts of the district attorney or of the trial court; that the record discloses a verdict and judgment proper under the evidence, and no miscarriage of justice can be said to have resulted.