Storke

The defendant was convicted of the crime of libel. She prosecutes this appeal from the judgment, and an order denying her motion for a new'trial. It is conceded that the evidence sustains the verdict, and that the instructions given to the jury were correct. Defendant, however, claims that numerous errors were committed in the rejection of testimony, and the refusal of the court to give an instruction asked by defendant.

I. The defendant called one Ivison as a witness, and asked him this question: “Now, I will ask you if any application was ever made to you for permission to enter those rooms, or to give the keys to any person for the purpose of entering those rooms?” The district attorney objected to the question on the ground that it was incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial, and the objection was sustained. It is claimed that this evidence was material for the purpose of impeaching one Peraude, a witness for the people. Peraude testified that on a certain occasion, before the trial, during the absence of defendant from her rooms, witness and' one Storni entered therein; that Storni lifted witness up, and he stood on-top of Storni and entered through a transom window; that he…