Forbragd

The appellant was charged on information, tried and convicted of the crime of incest and appeals from the judgment and from the order denying him a new trial.

No good purpose would be accomplished by a recital of the details of the testimony of the prosecutrix. Her testimony was direct and positive, not only as to the act complained of but of the subsequent abortion in which the appellant abetted.

Appellant’s counsel, in his cross-examination, developed certain inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecuting witness, and asserts it is unreasonable and not in accord with truth or reason, but it was the province of the jury to weigh all of the evidence admitted by the court and determine where the truth lay, and they, after listening to the testimony introduced by the People and the defendant, under proper instructions and before a fair and impartial court, found the defendant guilty of the crime of incest.

Mr. Fred Hauser, a police officer of the city of Sacramento, called as a witness by the People, testified on cross-examination, as to a conversation upon the arrest of defendant between himself and appellant:

The appellant, as a witness in his own behalf, was on…