Show I GOOD And No Sorrow Sorro I ant am en an old lady Jady and had co cot my ure lit until n a CIU then I A dri drink that good and sorrow Fo For m ny years I had been trou bled wIth constipation and oh trouble t sleeplessness and other I iii liB and aDd although I 1 had been constant constantly ly I got almost no relief I 1 have bave always alouys been n a great worker With many cares and often In the JOrn lug InK I 1 would feel unequal to my dally daily tak S So I would drink A good stiff tup rup or of coffee of which I 1 was Tas very fond aM then for tor two or three hours after afterward afterward ward I would sel so PO smart and buoy buoyant buoyant ant and keyed up to such a high rote that I could undertake mo most t anything But along 11 the reaction lion tion would begIn and leave me inc stranded on a lounge until dinner time Then I would get a cup ot of tee ter to tide me over the afternoon So It went on for 9 number of J years e rs and the great wonder is 18 that I 1 did not altogether I must have hav had n a good constitution Uon En Every ry t got a worse At and with great reluctance r was forc forced to the conclusion that It was coffee coffeo that the cause of oC my mahy tro troubles bles So I lo ked the matter up carefully quit the coffee and began the use ot of the b t J wisdom or of thIs change was Soon soon shown tn in a material Improvement In my health I have been using I do not flat have hILve that unnatural ral elation and eon consequent reaction and the craving has left Iam now strong It Tong and steady all ot or the time I Name ame given by Po um Co attle Uch Mich J LOOk In each package for the famous t f lithe book The Road to by l 1 r the state against the thep p and nd ot Of J for forthe forthe the defendant ant and und under r fit exception With all deference to the vIews of the court It seems to us clear that the Mor case whIch decides that toe tos Offered by the defendant him himself self may properly be received b br the court and need not be limited In Its effect the courts own motion js Is not hot at all an authority to establish that testImony adduced by the state over the objection of ef the defendant need not be so limited It appears to us vary probable that the distinction In fn the two to oases has been beon by the court and we beg bel the court to reconsider whether the case Is In any respect In con conflict lct with dur our views lews or is an authority for tor a ruling upon tipon the In question In the ease at t bar |