Polytinsky v. Johnston

Counsel for appellant present several assignments of error raising kindred questions under the same argur ment. This they may do. Sovereign Camp v. Craft (Ala. Sup.) 99 South. 167. In effect, they are that reversible error was committed in admitting, over defendant’s objection, and in refusing to exclude, evidence “regarding the books kept by appellant” (defendant) “and specifically that part showing a purchase” (of a bale of cotton) “from O. O. Hood.” It is insisted that defendant’s cotton book could not be looked to as tending- to prove the alleged purchase of the bale of cotton from…