Jeppson

This is one of the Rio Iinda group of eases, and in its *928 geperal aspect is like the Melin Case (No. 5671) 36 F.(2d) 907 .

The assignment touching the disposition of the demurrer is ruled adversely to appellant by our decision in that case.

There are no assignments predicated on the reception or rejection of evidence, and the record exhibits no exceptions of any character to the court’s refusal or failure to give requested instructions.

As to the instructions given, the exceptions were very general, and in the main' failed to direct attention to any objectionable feature. The main contention now made is that in some respects the court’s comment upon the evidence was argumentative and unfair. But, upon an examination of the instructions as a whole, and considering them in the light of the evidence adduced, we are not convinced that they were so unfair that they are brought within the principle under which appellate courts sometimes grant relief where appellant has failed to take appropriate exceptions in the court below. To illustrate, one of the more specific exceptions was that, “The defendant excepts to the charge * * * with reference to the testimony of the witness…