KFLCC Kingdom Law 2nd Ed.

130

BIDAL

BETTERMENT

BIAS. Inclination; bent; prepossession; a preconceived opinion; a predisposition to decide a cause or an issue in a certain way, which does not leave the mind perfectly open to conviction. Maddox v. State, 32 Ga. 587, 79 Am. Dec. 307; Pierson v. State, 18 Tex. App. 558; Hinkle v. State, 94 Ga. 595, 21 S. E. 601. This term is not synonymous with "preju dice." By the use of this word in a statute de claring disqualification of jurors, the legisla ture intended to describe another and somewhat different ground of disqualification. A man cannot be prejudiced against another without being biased against him; but he may be biased without being prejudiced. Bias is "a particular influential power, which sways the judgment; the inclination of the mind towards a particu lar object." It is not to be supposed that the legislature expected to secure in the juror a state of mind absolutely free from all inclina tion to one side or the other. The statute means that, although a juror has not formed a judgment for or against the prisoner, before the evidence is heard on the trial, yet, if he is under such an influence as so sways his mind to the one side or the other as to prevent his deciding the cause according to the evidence, he is in competent. Willis v. State, 12 Ga. 444. Actual bias consists in the existence of a state of mind on the part of the juror which satisfies the court, in the exercise of a sound discretion, that the juror cannot try the issues impartially and without prejudice to the sub stantial rights of the party challenging. State v. Chapman, 1 S. D. 414, 47 N. W. 411, 10 L. R. A. 432; People v. McQuade, 110 N. Y. 284, 18 N. E. 156, 1 L. R. A. 273; People r. Wells, 100 Cal. 227, 34 Pac 71& An offer by an intending purchaser to pay a designated price for property which Is about to be sold at auction. U. S. v. Vest al (D. C.) 12 Fed. 59; Payne v. Cave, 3 Term, 149; Eppes v. Railroad Co., 35 Ala. 56. — Bid in. Property sold at auction is said to be "bid in" by the owner or an incumbrancer or some one else who is interested in it, when he attends the sale and makes the successful bid.— Bid off. One is said to "bid off" a thing when he bids for it at an auction sale, and it is knocked down to him in immediate succes sion to the bid and as a consequence of it. Ep pes v. Railroad Co., 35 Ala. 56; Doudna v. Harlan, 45 Kan. 484, 25 Pac. 883.— Bidder. One who offers to pay a specified price for an article offered for sale at a public auction. Webster v. French, 11 111. 254.— Biddings. Offers of a designated price for goods or other property put up for sale at auction.— By-bid ding. In the law relating to sales by auction, this term is equivalent to "puffing." The prac tice consists in making fictitious bids for the property, under a secret arrangement with the owner or auctioneer, for the purpose of mis leading and stimulating other persons who are bidding in good faith.— Upset bid. A bid made after a judicial sale, but before the suc cessful bid at the sale has been confirmed, larger or better than such successful bid, and made for the purpose of upsetting the sale and securing to the "upset bidder" the privilege of taking the property at his bid or competing at a new sale. Yost v. Porter, 80 Va. 858. An Invitation of friends to drink ale at the house of some poor man, who hopes thereby to be relieved by charitable contribution. It is something like "house-warming," i, e., a visit of friends BID. BIDAL, or BIDAIiL.

How. Prac. (N. T.) 220; Abell v. Brady, 79 Md. 94, 28 Atl. 817; Chase v. Sioux City, 86 Iowa, 603, 53 N. W. 333. —Betterment acts. Statutes which, provide that a bona fide occupant of real estate making lasting improvements in good faith shall have a lien upon the estate recovered by the real owner to the extent that his improvements have increased the value of the land. Also called "occupying claimant acts." Jones Y. Hotel Co., 86 Fed. 386. 30 a C. A. 108. As a measure or indication of distance, this word has the effect of ex cluding the two termini. Revere v. Leonard, 1 Mass. 93; State v. Godfrey, 12 Me. 366. See Morris & E. R. Co. v. Central R. Co., 31 N. J. Law, 212. If an act is to be done "between" two cer tain days, it must be performed before the commencement of the latter day. In com puting the time in such a case, both the days named are to be excluded. Richardson v. Pord, 14 111. 333; Bunce v. Reed, 16 Barb. (N. Y.) 352. In case of a devise to A. and B. "between them," these words create a tenancy in com mon. Lashbrook v. Cock, 2 Mer. 70. This term is properly used to distinguish a sale of liquors to be drunk for the pleasure of drinking, from liquors to be drunk in obedience to a physician's ad vice. Com. v. Mandeville, 142 Mass. 469, 8 N. E. 327. Be fore the Britons and Saxons had introduced the general use of money, they traded chiefly by exchange of wares. Wharton. BEYOND SEA. Beyond the limits of the kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; out side the United States; out of the state. Beyond sea, beyond the four seas, beyond the seas, and out of the realm, are synonymous. Prior to the union of the two crowns of Eng land and Scotland, on the accession of James I., the phrases "beyond the four seas," "beyond the seas," and "out of the realm," signified out of the limits of the realm of England. Pan coast's Lessee v. Addison, 1 Har. & J. (Md.) 350, 2 Am. Dec. 520. In Pennsylvania, it has been construed to mean "without the limits of the United States," which approaches the literal signification. Ward v. Hallam, 2 Dall. 217, 1 L. Ed. 355; Id., 1 Yeates (Pa.) 329; Green v. Neal, 6 Pet 291, 300, 8 L. Ed. 402. The same con struction has been given to it in Missouri. Keeton's Heirs v. Keeton's Adm'r, 20 Mo. 530. See Ang. Lim. §§ 200, 201. The term "beyond seas," in the proviso or sav ing clause of a statute of limitations, is equiv alent to without the limits of the state where the statute is enacted; and the party who is without those limits is entitled to the benefit of the exception. Faw v. Roberdeau, 3 Cranch, 174, 2 L. Ed. 402; Murray v. Baker, 3 Wheat 541, 4 L.*Ed. 454; Shelby v. Guy, 11 Wheat 361, 6 L. Ed. 495; Piatt v. Vattier, 1 Mc Lean, 146, Fed. Cas. No. 11,117; Forbes' Adm'r v. Foot's Adm'r, 2 McCord (S. C.) 331, 13 Am I>ec. 732; Wakefield v. Smart, 8 Ark. 488; Denham v. Holeman. 26 Ga. 382, 71 Am. Dec. 198; Galusha v. Cobleigh, 13 N. H. 79. BETWEEN. BEVERAGE. BEWARED. O. Eng. Expended.