Nash, )., that in a trial for murder, evidence of the character of the deceased as a violent and dangerous man is admissible if there is evidence tending to show that the killing was in self-defence, or where the evidence is wholly circumstantial, and the character of the transaction is in doubt. The view of Judge Battle is now held to be the law in this State (State v. Turpin, 77 N. C. 473, and subsequent cases). His opinions at his first term will be found in 30 N. C, and after his return to the bench in 44 N. C. to 63 N. C, inclusive. Among those that it may be interesting to note are Mclvin v. Easley, 46 N. C. 387, holding that medical and other scientific books are not admissible in evidence, though expats may be asked their opinion and the grounds for it, which may be founded in part on such books. In Commissioners of Raleigh v. Kane, 47 N. C. 288, it is held that the granting or refusing license to sell liquor, being to a certain extent discretion ary with the county authorities (when within their power), their action cannot be reviewed, either by appeal or certiorari. State v. Peter Johnson, 48 N. C. 266, enun ciates the well-established doctrine, that in trials for murder, if the killing by a deadly weapon is proved, the burden shifts, and is upon the prisoner to show all matters of ex cuse or mitigation. This was affirmed again by Judge Hattle in State v. Willis, 63 N. C. 26. In Lane v. Railroad, 50 N. C. 25, it is held that where a corporation has been brought into court under a wrong name, the court has power to amend the process by striking out that name and inserting the right one, 1 lie defendant being already in court by ser vice upon its officer. State v. Glen, 52 N. C. 321, is a leading case, discussing the rights of the public and of riparian owners over unnavi»able streams. In State v. Williams, 52 N. C. -446, it is hold that in trials for murder, where the identity of the body is destroyed by fire or other means, the corpus delicti may be proved by presumptive or circumstantial evidence.
In person, Judge Battle was rather be low medium size. He was simple in his manners, cordial, and without affectation. Though gentle and quiet in his demeanor, he was firm and fearless in the discharge of duty. In June, 1825, he married Miss Lucy Martin Plummer, the daughter of Kemp Plummer, a prominent lawyer of Warrenton. He was exceedingly fortunate in his choice of a wife. With her he enjoyed near half a century of a domestic happiness rarely granted to man. They lived to rear eight children to years of maturity. There were two noble sons, whose souls went up to God amid the smoke of battle, fighting for the Confederacy. Among the others are, (1) Hon. Kemp P. Battle, Treasurer of the State, 1866-1868; and from 1877 until his recent resignation President of the University, and now Professor of the newly established Chair of History in that institution. (2) Richard H. Battle, of Raleigh, one of the leading lawyers of North Carolina and President of the State Agricultural Society- He was State Auditor 1864-1 865. (3) Dr. W. H. Battle, a prominent physician of Anson County. For forty years Judge Battle was a com municant of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and for a quarter of a century a member of its diocesan and general conventions. His walk in life and conversation were without reproach. "The good gray bead which all men knew ' was indeed, as it should always be, a mark for honor. His old age was accompanied by "Honor, love, obedience, troops of friends." He died at Chapel Hill, March 14, 1879, in the seventy-seventh year of his age. When the inevitable hour came, he had no preparation to make; but •• Soothed and sustained By an unfaltering trust, approached his grave Like one who wraps the drapery of his couch Around him, and lies down to pleasant slumbers "
