Summary

Nathan Clifford Ewing v. Howard — Opinion of the Court

Universal rule is that where an instrument will bear two constructions equally consistent with its language, one of which will render it operative and the other void, the former will be preferred. [6]
Theory of the defendants is that the note is usurious and illegal on its face, but the authorities are clearly the other way, that the presumption is that the note was given upon a state of facts which authorized the taking of the instrument, and that the contract was lawful and valid.
Source: Wikisource

Nathan Clifford Ewing v. Howard — Opinion of the Court

They were introduced without objection, and the bill of exceptions states to the effect that there was no other evidence introduced by either party. Defendants moved for a new trial, and also in arrest of judgment, but the court overruled both motions, and the defendants excepted to the rulings of the court.
Settled rule of the court is that a motion for a new trial is addressed to the discretion of the court, and that the ruling of the court in granting or denying such a motion is not the proper subject of exceptions.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature