(dissenting in part).
I respectfully dissent from the ruling of the majority on Bill of Exception No. 19. The question of the State seeking to elicit an answer from the defendant as to a conviction against her was entirely proper. The objectionable matter which the court emphasizes by underlining was injected by the defense. The court was under no’ duty to instruct the jury to disregard the matter put before it by defense counsel. Moreover, the objection of defense counsel was maintained and the question was not answered.