The opinion
ON appellant’s motion for rehearing.
DAVIDSON, Judge.
By an able and well written motion for rehearing, appellant insists that we erred in holding admissible evidence of prior acts of intercourse between the parties.
The conclusion expressed in the original opinion was reached only after a careful consideration of the question by the entire court. We remain convinced that a correct conclusion was reached. It would serve no useful purpose to write further.
We cannot agree that in approving Bill of Exception No. 8 the trial court certified to the commission of error in admitting proof of the prior acts of intercourse, which we hold to be admissible.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.
Opinion approved by the court.