Code 1940, Tit. 7, § 273. Where no exception is reserved nothing is presented for review. Code, Tit. 7, §§ 434, 435. Scope and extent of cross-examination rests largely in trial court's discretion. Coates v. State, 27 Ala. App. 213, 169 So. 328; Sanders v. State, 243 Ala. 691, 11 So.2d 740. Witness may be asked on cross-examination if he is not under indictment for the same offense as is defendant. Houston v. State, 203 Ala. 261, 82 So. 503; White v. State, 12 Ala. App. 160, 68 So. 521; Coplon v. State, 15 Ala. App. 331, 73 So. 225. Where trial judge on objection to solicitor's argument sustains the objection and instructs jury to disregard same, no prejudice results thereby.

Erskine v. State, 21 Ala. App. 307, 107 So. 720; Aldridge v. State, 20 Ala. App. 456, 102 So. 785. The trial court's rulings on scope and extent of cross-examination are not reviewable unless abuse of court's discretion is manifest. Coates v. State, 27 Ala. App. 213, 169 So. 328. CARR, Judge.

After the lapse of thirty days from the date on which a judgment or decree is rendered the court loses all power over it unless a motion to set aside the judgment or decree has been filed and called to the attention of the Court and an order entered continuing it for hearing at a future date. Equity Rule 65; Kelley v. Chavis, 225 Ala. 218, 142 So. 423; Mt. Vernon Woodbury Mills v. Judges, 200 Ala. 168, 75 So. 916; Ex parte Margart, 207 Ala. 604, 93 So. 505; Southern R. Co. v. Blackwell, 211 Ala. 216, 100 So. 215; Ex parte Howard, 225 Ala. 106, 142 So. 403; Sisson v. Leonard, 243 Ala. 546, 11 So. 144; Ex parte Bergeron, 238 Ala. 665, 193 So. 113; Story Mercantile Co. v. McClellan, 145 Ala. 629, 40 So. 123; Stoutz v. Rouse, 75 Ala. 431; Coates v. State, 27 Ala. App. 213, 169 So. 328. After an appeal has been taken the trial court does not have jurisdiction to allow parties to intervene in the cause. Evans Howard Fire Brick Co. v. U.S., 236 U.S. 210, 35 S.Ct. 415, 59 L.Ed. 542; Kendrick v. Kendrick, 5 Cir., 16 F.2d 744. Parties seeking to intervene in a cause must have an interest in the subject matter of the litigation such as will entitle them to intervene.

Baker v. Rainer, 220 Ala. 207, 124 So. 737; Brasfield v. Hood, 221 Ala. 240, 128 So. 433; Sovereign Camp v. Gibbs, 217 Ala. 108, 114 So. 915; Southern R. Co. v. Gantt, 210 Ala. 383, 98 So. 192; Williams v. Anniston E. G. Co., 164 Ala. 84, 51 So. 385; American Tar Prod. Co. v. Jones, 17 Ala. App. 481, 86 So. 113; 2 Ala. Dig. Appeal Error, 1048 (1). 27 Ala. App. 213. Action for damages by W. H. Cartledge against Armour Co., and Claude Williams. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.