I concur in the judgment, on the ground that the court below erred in allowing the question quoted in the foregoing opinion to be put to *306the witness, Fannie Elliott, and in admitting her answer thereto. In my opinion, the instructions held to be erroneous in the foregoing, are not erroneous. (People v. Hong Ah Duck, 61 Cal. 387, People v. Raten, 63 Cal. 421.)