Volume 112 — Alabama Reports

Tried before tbe Hon. George E. Brewer. The appellant, Ben Crawford, was jointly indicted with Henry Evans for murder in the second degree, for killing one A. M. Palmer, was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentenced to nine years imprisonment in the penitentiary. On motion of the appellant, there was a severance, and Ben Crawford was tried separately.

Tried before the Hon. O. J. Semmes. The appellant, John Fitzgerald, was tried under an indictment charging him with murder in the first degree, for killing one William Case ; and was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree, and sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail for six months.

Tried before the Hou. James J. Banks. The appellant was indicted, tried and convicted for manslaughter in the first degree, and sentenced to the penitentiary for three years.

Tried before the Hon. N. D. Denson. The appellant was tried and convicted under an indictment charging that he “had presented a pistol at Hubbard Glasscock, against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.” This indictment was found under the provisions of ‘ ‘An act to protect human life, ’ ’ which is as follows: “Section 1.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. The prosecution in this case was commenced by the following affidavit, which was made in Jefferson county ; “Personally appeared before me, A. A. Harris, a justice of the peace in and for said county, Leroy Louis, who being duly sworn says on oath, that Richard Louis, within twelve months before making this affidavit, in said county did commit assault and battery with a weapon or assault or affray on the person of Leroy Louis, against…

Tried before the Hon. William S. Anderson. The appellant, Sam Wilkins, was indicted and tried for the murder of one Chambliss, “by hanging him with a rope, ” was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to the penitentiary for life.

The legislature did not have the right to pass a criminal law which based the defendant’s right to appeal upon his financial ability to make bond; and if such construction is to be placed upon section 4226 of the Criminal Code, then said section is unconstitutional. — Reeves v. State, 96 Ala., 37 ; Sullivan v. Adapts, 3 Gray, 477; State v. Everett, 14 Minn. 332 ; Jones v. Robbins, 8 Gray, 341.

Tried before the Hon. James A. Bilbro. The facts of this case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. William S. Anderson. The appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of an assault and battery. Upon the hearing of the cause, as is shown by the bill of exceptions, the State introduced evidence tending to show that the defendant was guilty as charged; and the defendant introduced evidence tending to show that he was not guilty as charged.

Tried before the Hon. Henry C. Speake. The appellant was tried and convicted under an indictment, preferred on February 27, 1895, which was as follows: “The grand jury of said county charge that before the finding of this indictment, Earnest Dentler engaged in, or carried on the. business of a dealer in ‘Playing Cards,’ without a license, and contrary to law, against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.” The defendant demurred to this indictment on the grounds,…

Tried before the Hon. Samuel E. Greene . The appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of grand larceny, in feloniously taking and carrying away money to the amount of fifty dollars, the personal property of one John Murray. The indictment under which the defendant was convicted was preferred against Charlie Cole, Obe Lovelace and the appellant, Anderson Hunter. A severance having been granted on motion of Anderson Hunter, he was tried alone.

•Appeal from the City Court of Gadsden. Tried before the Hon. John H. Disque. This was an action brought by the appellees, Danfortli & Armstrong, against the appellant, the Tennessee & Coosa Railroad Company, to recover for work and labor done under a contract for the construction of a railroad, and for damages resulting from an alleged breach of said contract.

urt of Birmingham. Tried before the Hon. H. A. Sharpe. On the 22d day of March, 1895, appellee, Elizabeth C. Starr, brought this suit against appellant for five thousand dollars damages, for injuries sustained by her on one of the highways of the city of Birmingham.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. This action was brought by the appellant, Mrs. Rebecca Loventhal, against the appellee, the Home Insurance. Company, to recover $700, alleged to. be due on a policy of insurance, taken out by plaintiff in tlie defendant company, on a building which was destroyed by fire previous to the bringing of the suit.

Heard before the Hon. William S. Thorington. The proceedings in this case were commenced by a petition, addressed to the judge of the City Court of Montgomery, which was as follows : ‘ ‘Your petitioner.

Heard before the Hon. S. K. McSpadden. The bill in this case was filed on July 4, 1894, by the the appellee, F. C. McKeever, in behalf of himself and all other creditors, who are entitled to participate in the funds hereinafter described -and who pay tlieir proportion of the costs of this proceeding.

Tried before the lion. W. W. Wilicerson. This action was brought on June 18, 1895, by the appellant, Louella Buckalew, as administratrix of the estate of William H. Buckalew, deceased, against the appellee, the Tennessee Coal, Iron& Railroad Company.

Tried before the Hon. J. M. Carmichael. This was a statutory action of ejectment brought by the appellees against John P. Foy, as administrator of the estate of Mrs. Welborn, deceased, and George M. Jordan, who was tenant in possession of the land sued for. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. All exemptions are statutory or constitutional, and must be governed by the law in force at the time the right to them accrues.

Tried before the Hon. H. A. Sharpe. This was an action brought by the appellee, Thomas F. Bailey, against the appellant, to recover damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been inflicted by reason of the negligence of the defendant. The complaint as originally filed contained five counts. The court gave the general affirmative charge in favor of the defendant as to the second, third, fourth and fifth counts.

Tried before the Hon. John E. Tyson. This action was brought by the State against David Fleming for the price of licenses as a retail liquor dealer for three years. The complaint .contained three counts.

- Heard before the Hon. Thomas Cobbs. The bill in this case was -filed by Malcolm R. Murray, the appellee, against Charles H. Halsey and William L. Halsey, individually, and against the firm of C. H. & W. L. Halsey, a firm composed of Charles H. and William L. Halsey.

The petitioner was engaged in the business of driving a cab in the city of Mobile, and was arrested on the 18th day of July, 1896, while standing upon the Union depot platform in said city. When arraigned for trial before the mayor, he demanded that some written statement or complaint be filed setting out the facts constituting the offense with which he was charged.

Tried before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. This was an action brought by the appellee, John F. McDonald, as the administrator of the estate of Jesse L. McDonald, deceased, against the Alabama Midland Railway Company, to recover damages for the alleged negligent killing of the plaintiff’s intestate.

Heard before the Hon. Thomas Cobbs. The bill in this case was filed by the appellee, Mary L. B. Ensley, as executrix of Enoch Ensley, deceased, against the Lady Ensley Coal, Iron & Railroad Company,… Held: that they are in effect second mortgage bonds. If a party adopts a part of a transaction, he adopts all. He must reject it entirely if he desires to obtain relief against it. — 2 Pom.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. This was an action brought by the appellant, the Jasper Mercantile Company, a corporation, against Martin O’Rear, and counted upon an account. The defendant pleaded the general issue, payment, and the following special pleas: “4th.

Heard before the Hon. Thomas' Cobbs. The bill in this case was filed by the appellant, Eugene Trump, against Archie McDonnell, Jr., the appellee. The purpose pf the bill, and the ’facts necessary for an understanding of the opinion on the present appeal are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

of Mobile. Heard before the Hon. W. H. Tayloe. The bill in this case was fil,ed by the appellee, the ■City of Mobile, against the Bienville Water Supply Company, on May 26, 1894; and prayed to have the Water Supply Company enjoined, from cutting off the water supplied to the city by said Water Supply Compano under a contract with the said city, and from lowering the pressure thereof.

Tried before the Hon. H. C. Speaks. This action was brought by • the appellant, H. C. Higman, against the appellee, M. C. Camody, to recover damages for injuries to a barge owned- by the plaintiff, which injuries were sustained while the barge was in the possession of the defendant, who hired the same from the plaintiff. Issue was joined upon the plea of the general issue. The tendencies of the evidence are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

<p> Statu-tory Action of Ejectment. </p> <p>1. Overruling of general demurrer no reversible, error. — A demurrer to replications upon the ground that “said replications are insufficient in law,” being general, is properly overruled.</p>

Tried before the Hon. M. E. Milligan, Special Judge.. This was a statutory trial of the right of property, which was instituted in the following manner : M. Cody, the appellee, recovered a judgment against one W. J. Smith and another. Upon this judgment an execution was issued and levied upon certain property, as the property of said W. J. Smith.

Heard before the Hon. W. W. Wilkerson. On the 3d of October, 1891, the appellants, C. S. and W. T. Simmons suing as Simmons & Co., filed this bill against D. W. and W. H. Peace, late… Held: as matter of law, to be fraudulent. — Smith v. Collins, 94 Ala. 394; Montgomery v. Bayliss, 96 Ala. 342. The subsequent appropriation of part of the proceeds of such a conveyance to payment of some of his debts, will not vindicate the purpose of the grantor, and make the conveyance good.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. This action was brought by the appellants, M. Forst and her husband, A. Forst, against H. N. Leonard, S. J. Alfred, William B. Gerre, John A. Hall, E. D. Phillip's and E. M. Robinson.

Tried before the Hon. James A. Bilbro. The proceedings in this case were had upon a motion made by the appellant for a summary judgment against the appellees, B. S. Dickson and the sureties on his official bond as sheriff, for the failure of said Dickson to indorse on an execution delivered to him the true date of its delivery.

Tried before the Hon. John R. Tyson. These two cases were identically the same with the exception of the names of the plaintiffs and the amounts of the judgment of each plaintiff; involved the same questions of law; and were, therefore, submitted together on the present appeal. What is said in the following statement of facts applies to the facts in each of the cases.

Tried before the Hon. Henry C. Speake. This was an action counting upon a policy of fire insurance, and was brought by the appellees, Hall & Brother, against the appellant.

Tried before the Hon. M. E. Milligan, Special Judge. Held: until they were ousted by some legal proceedings instituted by persons having a superior right to the offices for which the contest was instituted.— Moulton v. Reid, 54 Ala. 320. Contest is the proper manner of trying title to'an office of a municipal corporation.

Tried before the Hou. H. C. Speaks. This action was brought by the appellee, Felix M. Smith, against the appellant, Daniel H. Turner and Lucy T. Turner.

Tried before the Hon. Henry C. Speake. This action was brought by the appellee, F. M. Ryan, against the American Oak Extract Company, to recover an amount alleged to be due plaintiff for 50 cords of wood, under a contract which it was alleged the defendant made with the plaintiff.

Clair. Tided before the PIoxx. George E . Brewer,; This actioxi was brought by the appellee, M.M. Smith, against 'St. 'Clair County.' The conxplaint was as follows : “Plaintiff claixns of the defendant, a body corporate ixndeX' the laws of the State of Alabama, the sum of sixty-four dollars and 56 cents ($64.56), 'due from it by account oxi the 6th day of August, 1894, being for compensation'for services rexidered said corporation as'county registrar for said county for and…

William L. Stephens. •' . The facts of tlie case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The deed having been admitted without objection at the time, the motion to exclude, made after the evidence had closed, came too late. — Ladd v. Smith, 10 So. Rep. 836 ; Stovall v. Fowler, 72 Ala. 77 ; Torrey v. Forbes, 94 Ala. 135 ; Black v. T. C., L. &R.R. Go., 93 Ala. 109 ; Cooper v. Watson, 73 Ala. 252 ; Riggs v. Fuller, 54 Ala. 141.

Tried before the Hon. M. E. Milligan, Special Judge. This was'a statutory action of ejectment, brought by the appellees against the appellant. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The cause was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury, and upon the hearing of all the evidence, the court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff, to the rendition of which judgment the defendant duly excepted.

Heard before the Hon. Thomas Cobbs. The bill in this case was filed on January 11, 1892, by the appellee, E. W. Rucker, against John A. Milner, as the administrator of E. L. Milner, deceased, and against the widow and heirs-at-law of said E. L. Milner.

Heard before the Hon. William H. Tayloe. This suit was begun on March 28th, 1892, by a bill being filed in the chancery court of Mobile county by the appellees, Theodore O. Bates and others, against the appellants, Frederick G. Bromberg, individually and as executor of the estate of Miss Susan F. Bouse, deceased, Elizabeth C. Zadek and .Henry Alexander, and also against other defendants who do not appeal, or assign errors, namely, Mollie, Nathan and Susan Alexander, the…

Tried before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. This was a statutory action of detinue, brought by the appellee, L. E. Irby, against the appellants, Hilliard Browder and Jake Wilson, in which th.e plaintiff claimed several specified articles of personal property.

Tried before the Hon. W. P. Chitwood. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. There were several exceptions reserved to the rulings of the court upon the evidence, but it is unnecessary to set out these rulings in detail. Upon the introduction of all the evidence, the plaintiff requested the court to give the general affirmative charge in its favor, and duly excepted to the court’s refusal to give such charge.

Appeals from the Circuit and Probate Court of Cleburne . Heard before the Hon. D. C. Blackwell, Special Judge of the Circuit Court; and Hon. W .F. Alsabrook, Special Judge of the Probate Court. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The order appointing the special judge was void. There is no allegation any where that he was a disinterested person or learned in the law.

Heard before the Hon. William H. Simpson. The appellant, Robert M. Dittey, as receiver of the Citizens’ National Bank of Hillsboro, Ohio, filed the bill in this case on November 3, 1893, against the First National Bank of Hillsboro, Ohio, and the Scatcherd Lumber Company and Clarence M. Overman.

Tried before tbe Hon. James J. Banks. On June 1, 1895, the clerk of the circuit court of Jefferson county,'Alabama, issued an execution, directed to the sheriff, reciting that there had been issued from his said court an execution dated May 8, 1895, against Susan Lunsford, as the executrix of the estate of George Lunsford, deceased, which execution had been returned “No property found in my county, ” and that execution now issues against Susan Lunsford individually upon her…

Tried before the Hon. Henry C. Speake. This action -was brought by the appellant, R. B. Lindsay, against Colbert county, to recover the sum of $1,000, which the plaintiff claimed for services as the attorney in a chancery suit for the defendant.

Heard before the Hon. Wm. H. Simpson. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. 1. When lands of a decedent are sold by an administrator under an order of the probate court, the legal title is retained, and remains in the heirs, as security for the purchase money.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The burden of proving defenses set up by special pleas was on defendant, and the failure to show the character of Boulden’s holding was fatal to the plea. An absolute, unconditional ownership may exist without deed. — Bonham v. Iowa Ins. Go., 25 Iowa 328.

Tried before the Hon. H. A. Sharpe. This action was brought by the appellee, Goode Sampson, against the appellant, the Highland Avenue & Belt Railroad Company, to recover damages for killing a mule and destroying a wagon and harness, the property of the plaintiff. The injury complained of was inflicted on November 28, 1888, and the present suit was instituted on December 3, 1888.

Tried before the Hon. Thomas R. Roulhac. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the appellant, C. L. Watson, against William Kirby, Albert Kirby, Charles E. Smith and E. M. Perry, partners doing business under the name and style of Kirby & Sons. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. This was astatutory trial of the right of property, .which was instituted by the appellee, Wm. Gamer, interposing a claim to 70 sacks of guano, which was levied upon as the property of one John Lisenby, under an execution issued upon a judgment, which the appellant, The South Alabama Oil & Fertilizer Co. had recovered against said Lisenby.

Heard before the Hon. Thomas Cobbs. The bill in this case was filed on January 29, 1894, by the appellant, J. B. Jones, against the appellee, Jourd White, to have enjoined the foreclosure of a mortgage on land by sale under the power contained therein, on the ground that the mortgagor, who was complainant in the bill, had paid the mortgage debt in full. On the filing of the bill a temporary injunction was granted.

Tried before tbe Hon. John R. Tyson. Tbis was an action of assumpsit brought by tbe appellee against “J. W. Moore, A. Kirkland and McD. Cain, partners, under tbe name of Moore, Kirkland & Co.,” to recover tbe price of an electric light plant sold by plaintiff to defendants. Tbe complaint counted on the common counts. To tbe action tbe following pleas were filed: “1.

Heard before the Hon. William H. Tayloe. The bill in this case, as amended, was filed by the appellee, Benton H. Beverly, against the appellant, Harriet E. Vick, on March 4, 1893; and sought to redeem an undivided one-half interest in a certain lot in the town of Thomasville, Clarke county, Alabama, from a sale under execution as the property of the complainant, and to have said lot sold for partition between the complainant and the respondent, Harriet E. Vick.

Appear from Circuit Court of Cleburne. Tried before the Hon. George E. Brewer. This was an action brought by the appellants against the appellee, as administrator of the estate of J. J. Teague, deceased, and counted upon a promissory note, executed by J. J. Teague to the plaintiffs. The complaint as originally filed contained two counts.

Tried before the Hon. M. Y. Hayes. E. W. Holdsombeck, as administrator de bonis non of the estate of John Latham, deceased, filed his petition in the probate court of Bibb county, in which he averred that there was a dispute existing between him, as such administrator, and certain heirs of the widow of John Latham, deceased, as to certain personal property, which had been set apart to the widow of petitioner’s intestate, and to which, after said widow’s death, her heirs laid…

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. Tbis was an action for money had and received, brought by the appellants, William Carrier and Brooks Suden, against the appellee, James A. Eastis. The money sued for had been paid by the plaintiffs .to the defendant upon an executory contract for the purchase of land.

Tried before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. This was an action brought by the appellee, Joseph Parker, against the Alabama Midland Railway Company, to recover damages for the alleged negligent killing by one of the defendant’s trains of a cow, the property of the plaintiff.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. This was a statutory action of ejectment, brought by the appellee, Mildred C.. Lawson, against the appellant, Abner J. Perry, to recover certain lands specifically described in the complaint, and was instituted on March 19, 1895. The defendant pleaded the general issue and the statute of limitations and adverse possession for ten years. The other facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. This was an action of trover, brought by the appellant, George P. Bent, against the appellee, W. J. Jerkins, to recover damages for the alleged conversion of a piano.

Tried before the Hon. John H. Disque. This was a statutory action of detinue, brought by the appellant against the appellee. The cause was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury; and upon the hearing of all the evidence the court rendered judgment in favor of the defendant, and from this judgment the present appeal is prosecuted. Under the opinion on this appeal, it is unnecessary to set out the facts in detail.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. The fact's of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. Heiiry C. Speak®. This action was brought by the appellant against the appellees, and counted upon a promissory note, which was given by the defendants for the price of fertilizer purchased from the plaintiff. The only rulings of the court which are reviewed on the present appeal, are sufficiently shown in the opinion. The appeal is taken from a judgment in favor of the defendants.

Tried before the Hon. James W. Lapsley. This appeal is taken from the rulings of the court below on the pleadings, as is provided for by the acts of the legislature establishing the city court at Anniston (Acts, 1888-89, p. 572). The action was brought by the appellee, James Cunningham, against the Southern Railway Company, the appellant. The complaint contains three counts.

Tried before the Hon. John H. Disqxte. This was an appeal from a judgment rendered in the city court of Gadsden overruling a motion made by the appellant. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. James A. Bilbko. ' This action was-brought by the appellant Samuel H. Glover, against the appellees, J. L. Gentry and C. B, Moore, as administrators of the estate of William Mo.ore, deceased, and counted upon a promissory note for $1,250 alleged to have been executed by William Moore,' the defendant’s intestate, bearing date July 9, 1888.

Tried before the Hon. William IT. Taylob. Fannie Julia Scott departed this life under the age of 18 years without issue. Her father and mother had died prior to her death,- and she left surviving her John Edwin King Scott, a half brother, a son of her father by his second wife. She left an estate consisting of real and personal property.

Tried before the Hon. Georue E. Brewer. This was an action brought by the appellee, the First National Bank of Rome, Georgia, on a promissory note made by J. R. Graham & Son, and the appellant, James H. Savage, and payable to Mrs. E. J. McGhee. The note was duly transferred to the plaintiff bank.

Tried before the Hon. John H. Disque. This was a statutory action of ejectment, brought by the appellees against the appellant. ■The cause was tried upon issue joined upon the plea of not guilty. Held: “It will be sufficient if the husband merely signs the deed; it is not necessary for him to be named in the deed as one of the grantors.” — 5 Amer. & Eng.

Heard before the Hon. John A. Foster. The bill in this case was filed by the appellants against the appellees,'to foreclose a mortgage. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. On the final submission of the cause on the pleadings and proof, the chancellor decreed that the complainants were not entitled to the relief prayed for, and ordered the bill dismissed. From this decree the complainants appeal, and assign the rendition thereof as error. 1.

Tried before .the Hon. James J. Banks. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The assignments of error being made by all the appellants, and there being no' error of which the appellant, D. McDonald, can complain, the assignments of error will be disregarded.— Beach,man v. Aurora, &c., Manfg. Co., 110 Ala. 555 ; Kimhrell v. Rogers, 90 Ala. 339 ; Rudulphv. Brewer, 96 Ala. 189.

Tried before the Hon. James A. Bilbro. ■ ; This was an action brought by the appellee, Henry Kelton, against the Louisville & Nashville Eailroad Company, to recover damages for the alleged negligent… Held: “if the exigencies of the business require rapid transit, railroad companies are not required to refrain from it because of increased danger to stock.” — 43 Miss. 233 ; 46 Miss. 373 ; 19 Penn. State, 278; Winston v. Raleigh & Gaston R. R. Go., 90 N. C. 66.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. This action was brought on June 28, 1894, by the appellant, E. L. Gravlee. against the appellee, L. W. Williams, to recover $1,640, as the statutory penalty (Code of 1886, §3296) for the cutting of certain trees and saplings on plaintiff’s land. Issue was joined on the plea of the general issue.

Tried before the Hon. H. A. Sharpe. This action was brought oil March 28, 1896, by the appellant, the Jefferson County Savings Bank, against the appellee, Robert G. Hewitt, who was, at the time, tax collector of Jefferson county. The complaint contained two counts.

Tried before the Hon. John H. Disque. This action was brought by the appellee, Obal Christopher, as receiver of the O’Conner Mining & Manufacturing Company, against the appellants, the Etowah Mining Company and the Attalla Mining & Manufacturing Company ; and sought to recover an amount alleged to be due upon an account. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. James W. Lapsley. This suit was brought by the appellant, the city of Anniston, against the Southern Railway Company, to recover a license tax alleged to be due plaintiff from the defendant.

Heard before the Hon. Jebe N. Williams. The amended bill in this cause was filed on October '15, 1894, by Cay, Hardie & Co. against Eliza A. Strickland and others.

Heard before the Hon. S. K. McSpadden. The bill in this case was filed on January 19, 1894, by the appellants, E. C. Johnson and her husband, against the appellees, Dollie Rogers and her husband, Joseph Rogers. The purpose of the bill and the facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. W. W. Wilkerson. This was a suit instituted by the appellee against the appellant, H. L. McConnell, and certain named contractors, to recover an amount alleged to be due the plaintiff for material furnished to the contractors, and used by them in building a house for H. L. McConnell, the owner, and for the establishment of a material-man’s lien upon the property.

Heard before the Hon. Price Williams, Jr. Augustus Stikes departed this life on the 20th day of May, 1890, in Mobile county, State of Alabama, leaving surviving him his four children, to-wit,' John A. Stikes, Henry M. Stikes, Charles A. Stikes and Augustus A. Stikes, who were all minors at the time of his death.

Tried before the Hon. William S. Andekson. This was a suit commenced before a justice of the peace on the 2d day of March, 1895, by the filing of a complaint which averred that plaintiff sued ‘ ‘to recover the possession of the following tracts of land in the western suburbs and within the limits of the old city of Mobile, viz., [describing the lands] , of which he was in possession, and upon which, pending such possession, and before the commencement of this suit, the…

■ Heard before the Hon. William H. Tayloe. The appeal in this case is taken from a decree of the chancellor dismissing a bill filed by the appellants, Bettie Selden Bailey, who was formerly Bettie Seldon, and others, against the appellee. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. 1.

Heard before the Hon. John H. Disque. The bill in this case was filed on October 28, 1895, by the appellant, Robert B. Kyle, against the appellees.

Tried before the Hon. H. C. Speake. This action was brought by the appellee, Joe Harris, against the City Council of Sheffield, to recover damages for personal injuries, which were inflicted through the alleged carelessness or negligence of the defendant, its servants or agents, upon the plaintiff, while working for the defendant. The injuries complained of were received on the 16th day of April, 1889, and the suit was originally instituted on April 14th, 1890.

Heal’d before the Hon. W. W. Wilkerson. The appellee, Juda Sharrit, filed her bill in the city city court of Birmingham, against the appellant, H. J. Sharrit, her husband, praying for alimony.

' Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. William S. Anderson. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The amendment was allowed át a time when the sheriff did not have and could not have the actual or constructive redelivery or custody of the timber, which had been sold off and shipped across the ocean.

Tried before the Hon. John C. Anderson. This was action of trespass brought by the appellant against the appellee, and was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury. The facts of the case are sufficiently’stated in the opinion. The plaintiff appeals, and assigns as error the rulings of the court upon the evidence, and the judgment rendered. 1.

Heard before the Hon. Jere N. Williams. The bill in this case was filed on January 1, 1896, by the appellee, W. H. Wilson against E. S. Whaley, the appellant, to abate a public nuisance.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. This was an action of assumpsit originally brought by the appellees, B. F. Roden & Co. against E. Nisbett and S. J. G-uscott, lately doing business under the firm name of Nisbett & Co.; and counted upon four past due promissory notes, alleged by plaintiffs to have been executed by the defendants, and to contain a provision that the defendants waived all their right to claim personal property as exempt, and an agreement to pay all costs,…

Heard before the Hon. Jere N. Williams. The bill in this case was filed by the appellants, Robert N. Alston and others, against E. C. Marshall and others, the appellees; and prayed for an injunction of the sale of certain lands which were conveyed in a mortgage to the respondent, E. C. Marshall, and for the establishment of a trust in said lands in favor of the complainants. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. William W. Wilicerson. This action was brought by the appellee, Austin M. South, against the appellant, the Highland Avenue & Belt Railroad Company, to recover damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been caused by reason of the defendant’s negligence. The complaint contained nine counts.

Heard before the Hon. William H. Tayloe. The mayor and general council of the city of Mobile, on March 16, 1896, adopted a general license ordinance, levying a license tax against all trades and occupations carried on in said city, and included therein a license tax on bicycles.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. This action was commenced on August 19, 1895, and was brought by the appellee, I. W. Appling, against the appellants, Manier & Co., to recover damages for the breach of an agreement alleged to have been entered into by the plaintiff and the defendants. The complaint contained two counts, the allegations of which as to the agreement sued upon, are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tried before the Hon. James J. Banks. On July 10, 1894, H. M. Drennen, the appellee, instituted a suit against the appellants, O. E. Thomas and L. A. May, as late partners in business under the firm name of Thomas, May & Co.,to recover the sum of $2,916.70, with interest thereon, for the rent of a storehouse in the city of Birmingham.

Heard before the Hon. W. H. Simpson. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. 1. If any appurtenant right of Karcher was injured in the condemnation, it presents a case where damages must be assessed under the statute.

Tried before the Hon. W. W. Wilicerson. This was an action brought by the appellee, B. K. Collier, against the appellant, the Alabama Great Southern Railroad Company, to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been inflicted while the plaintiff. was a passenger, by reason of the defendant’s negligence. The allegations of negligence as contained in the complaint • are set forth in the opinion. To the complaint the defendant demurred upon the following grounds: 1.