given to his story. The former denotes the personal qualification of the witness; the hm-r his ieracity. A witness may be coin- flrut, and yet give incredible testimony; in may be incompetent, and yet his evi- hue, if received. be perfectly credible. Euuxdcncy is for ihe court: credibility for 3: [U1]. Yet in some cases the term “cred- Ild‘ is v-crl as an equivalent for “conipe- nag," Thin in a statute relnfing to the caution of wills. thc term "credibie wit- wt' in heirl to nicnn one who is entitied n he eainuiucd and to give evidence in a. Ivlnt of iuciin r; not nee <-snrily one who is fit-nally uurthy of belief, bi1t one who is mi an-[uaiified by inibeciiitv, interest, crime. nr uili-r caiise. 1 Jarm. Wills. 124: Smith 1 Joins, GS Vt 132. 34 Atl. 424: Ooni. v. llllmsl 127 Mass. 424, 34 Am. Rep. 391.
In French law. Oompetency, as applied in a court, iucaus its right to exeicise jurislhlon in a particular case.
COMPETENT. Duly qualified: answerin all requirements; adequate; suitable: otflkieui: capable; l " lly fit Levee Dist. 1-. Jiiiiilson. 176 Mo. 75 S. W. 679.
—Competent and omitted. In Search prac- II-rn. A term applied to a plea which might five hcen urged by a party during the depend- of a cause but VlI]iL'iJ had been omitted. l—Competent authority. As applied to nuts nnd public officers, this term imports ju- unn and due legal authority to deal with
5|! ‘articular matter in question. Mitehei v.
at ". ’.
, . . Ed. 383; Charles v. IflHPs_ 41 Minn. 201. 42 N. W. 935.—Cnmpe- it-iit evidence. That which the very nature vi the thing to be proven requires, as the pro- hnion of :1 writing where its contents are the t of inqliiry. 1 Grceni. Ev. § 2; ap-
ug v l\IcArl:irns, 1 Lea (Tcnn.) 500; Horbzic , -Into. 43 Tex 242: Porter v. Vaicnfine. 18 3i3¢— hop. 213, 41 N. Y. Supp. 507.—Conipetent witness. One who is legally qualificrl to ‘H hard to testify in a cause. Hosan v. Sher- E 'l[ich. GO: People v. Compton. 123 Cal. §fiii I‘ac 44; Com. v. Mullen, 97 Mass. 545.
COMPETITION. In Scotch practice. he i-nntest among creditors claiming on flu‘: respective diiigences, or creditors Claim- Clon their securities. Bell.
-Unfair competition in trade. See UN- PAIR.
COMPILE. To compile is to copy from fllhas nuthors into one rrorl:.- Between a Qmllui-in and an ahridgnieut there is a fin! vikliuction A compilation consists of -‘(Blvd extracts from different authors; an Qkilgnent is a condensation of the views 1 an author. Story v. Holconibe, 4 Mc- 306. 314. Fed. Cns. Nc. 1".497. —Compilat1on. A iitcrury production. com- gd of the works of others and iirmu::cd in a mi m.1nncr.—Compiled statutes. A
of the statutes existing and in force A fiien state, all laws and parts of laws filing to each subject-matter bein brought “filler under one head, and the who a arrang- Hl systematically in one book, either under an
aiphabeticai arrangement or some other plan of classification. Such a collection of statutes differs from a code in this, that none of the hws so compiled derives any new force or undergoes any modification in its relation to othvr stutuies in prwi matcrio from the fact of the compilation, while a code is a reenactment of the whole body of the positive law and is to be read and interpreted as one entire and homogeneous whole. Railway Co. v. Snte. 10-} (‘.:i. 831, 31 S. E. 531: Black. Interp. Laws, 1:. 3 .3.
GOMPLAINANT. In practice. One who applies to the courts for legal redrcss: one who exhibits a bill of complaint. This is the proper designaiion of one suing in equity. though "piaintifl"' is often used in equity proceedings as well as at law. Benefit .\ss'n V Robinson. 147 I11. 138, 35 N. E. 168,
COMPLAINT. In civil practice. In those states having a. Code of Civil l"roccd- ure, the complaint is the first or mitiaitory picading on the part of the plaintiff in a civil action. It corresponds to the declaration in the common-isvr practice. Code N. Y. 5 141: Sharon v. Sharon. 67 Cal. 1S5, 7 Psc. 456; Railroad Co. v. Young. 154 Ind. 24. 55 N. E. 853: .\IcMath v. Parsons, 26 Minn. 246, 2 N. W. 703.
The complaint shaii contain: (1) The titie of the cause. specifying the name of the court in which the action is brought, the name of the county in which the trial is rcuuirsd to be had. and the names of the parties to the action. plaintiff and defendant. (2) A plain and cocnise statement of the facts constituting a cause of action, nithout unnecessary repetition; and each material allegation shall be distinctly nuinhered (3) A demand of the reiicf to which the plaintiff supposes himself entitled. If the recovery of moncy be demanded, the amount there- of must be stated. Code N. C. 1883, 5 733. —Cross-complaint. In code practice. Whenever the defcndant seeks ailirruntive relief against any party, relating to or depending upon the contract or transaction upon which the action is hroiight, or affecting the property to which the action relates. he may. in addition to his answer, file at the some time, or by permission of the court subsequently, a cross-compiaint. The cross-complaint must he served upon the parties affected thereby, and such parties may demur or answer thereto as to the originni complaint. Code Civ. Proc. Cal § 4-12: Stand- lcy v. Insurance 00.. 95 Ind. 251: Harrison v. 'iicCoriniclx. 69 Cal. 616. 11 Pac. 456: Bank v. Itidpath, 29 Wash. 087. 70 Pac. 13').
In criminal law. A charge. preferred before a magistrate having jurisdiction. that a person named (or an unknown person) has committed a specified offense, with an offer to prove the fact. to the end that a prosecution may he instituted. It is a technical term, descriptive of proceedings before a magistrate. Hobbs v. Hill. 157 Mass. 5236. 32 N. lli 862: Com. v. Davis, 11 Pick. (Mass) 436; U. S. v. Collins (D. C.) 79 Fed 66: State v. Dodge 00.. 20 Neb. 595, 31 N. W. 117.
The complaint is an allegation. made before a proper magistrate. that a person has been ‘it f ds' td blicif CdAJ.
_f§§6,y§oaF.cignae pu oense. 0e 21