Noble

The plaintiff in error was convicted under an indictment which charged that on June 11, 1908, he “did unlawfully and maliciously assault, strike, beat, and wound one Joseph Richardson, contrary to the form of the statute,” etc.

He assigns error to the denial of his motion to discharge and dismiss the indictment against him because of the request of the prosecuting witness, which it is contended was preferred under section 254 of the Alaskan Code, which provides that: “If the party injured appear before the court at which the defendant is bound to appear, at any time before trial on an indictment for crime, and acknowledge in writing that he has received satisfaction for *670 the injury, the court may, at its discretion, on payment of the costs and expenses incurred, order all further proceedings to be stayed upon the prosecution, and the defendant to be discharged therefrom, but the order and the reasons therefor must be entered on the journal.”

The prosecuting witness, Richardson, presented an affidavit, which was filed, in which he said: “I do hereby ask and petition the court to dismiss the said above-entitled case now pending in your court against the said Jesse Noble (the…