Cain v. State

1. The verdict was not, for any reason assigned, erroneous.

2. The admissions of the State’s counsel were not at variance with the allegations in the indictment, and the verdict of guilty was authorized by the evidence.

3. When, in the course of a judicial investigation, an attorney at law, by the authority or permission of the court, administers the oath to a witness, he does so in behalf of the court. Consequently it may properly be alleged in an indictment assigning perjury upon the testimony of such a witness, delivered in a court of inquiry, that the oath was administered by the presiding…