David v. Correll

delivered the opinion of the Court.. Appellee brought an action of debt against appellant to recover the statutory penalty for cutting timber, pursuant to Sec. 5, Chap. 136, 2 Starr & Curtis’ Stat., 2388.

There was a verdict and judgment below for $100 and costs.

Appellant prosecutes this appeal and insists upon a reversal, because,

I. The appellee failed to prove that he was the owner in fee of the land on which the timber was cut.

2. Because the evidence did not show that appellant cut the timber knowingly and willfully, and

3. Because it is claimed the appellant and his grantors had been in the…