Volume 144 — Pennsylvania State Reports

Argued April 28, 1891 No. 379 January Term 1891, Sup. Held: in answer to the same point, that the plaintiff is entitled to damages, if he has sustained any, to his farm, on account of its use for dairy purposes, yet, we instruct you that you must not take into consideration, in estimating these damages, the fact that the railroad cuts the public road between his barn and -the spring of Rupp.

No. 382 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 192 September Term 1885, C. P. On August 14, 1885, William Mattimore, by his next friend Thomas Mattimore, brought trespass against the city of Erie, to recover damages for negligence causing injury to the plaintiff.

No. 17 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; .court below, No. 494 May Term 1891, C. P. To the number and term of the court below, there was ■ tiled a case stated in the nature of a special verdict for the opinion of the court, between William Westhafer, executor of Samuel Westhafer, deceased, plaintiff, and James Koons, defendant, setting out the facts in substance as follows: By his will, dated April 20, 1871, admitted to probate on October 9,1872, Samuel Westhafer made the following…

Nos. 46, 68 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 20 June Term 1887, C. P. in Equity.

No. 84 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 207 April Term 1887, C. P. On March 3, 1887, C. B. Canfield, surviving partner of C. B. Canfield and others, doing business as the New England Monument Company, brought assumpsit against F. A. Johnson and A. J. VanDusen, doing business as Johnson & VanDusen.

No. 345 January Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 42 September Term 1889, C. P. On August 22, 1889, H. W. Pickett, administrator of John W. Moore, deceased, brought assumpsit against the Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company of California, filing a statement of claim to recover upon a policy of insurance for $5,000, issued by said company upon the life of said John W. Moore on June 4, 1889. Issue.

No. 888 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 4 October Term 1889, C. P. in Equity.

No. 399 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court helow, No. 8 March Term 1890, Q. S. On June 2,1890, the grand jury returned as a true bill an indictment presenting: “ That B. J. Morningstar, late of said county, yeoman, to wit: On the first day of November, A. d. 1889, at Warren, in the county and state aforesaid, was a lawfully-constituted agent of the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, a corporation doing business in the state of Pennsylvania, with authority to solicit…

No. 434 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court- below, No. 58 March Term 1890, C. P. On December 26, 1886, an issue in sheriff’s interpleader was ordered, wherein O. S. Garretson and J. G. Garretson, doing business as the Buffalo Hardware Co., were made plaintiffs, and Wm.

No. 435 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 205 (215 ?) December Term 1889, C. P. To the number and term of the court below, the GeneseeFork Improvement Company, incorporated under the act of June 22, 1883, P. L. 156, for the purpose of driving and floating saw-logs, lumber and timber on the Genesee fork of Pine creek, brought assumpsit against James Ives, to recover tolls charged. Issue.

<p>1. An action for mesne profits was brought in the name of a husband, and wife in right of the wife, but tried on the merits as though it had been brought in the name of the husband for use of the wife. The error, though formal, was material, but was amendable in the Supreme Court: § 2, act of May 20, 1891, P. L. 101.</p> <p>2. The return of the summons, in the preceding ejectment in which the plaintiff had judgment for the land, was conclusive evidence of the possession of all the defendants at the time of service, and presumptive evidence of their continuance in possession until overcome by evidence to the contrary.</p> <p>3. The record of the ejectment being in evidence, in the action for mesne profits against the same defendants, the trial court could not say to the jury, as matter of law, that there was no evidence connecting one of the defendants with the possession of the other.</p> <p>4. Testimony of one of the defendants, tending to show merely that he alone had an actual residence on the land, during the time claimed for, was insufficient to rebut the presumption of his co-defendant’s joint possession and liability: Sopp v.' Winpenny, 68 Pa. 78; Miller v. Henry, 84 Pa. 33, distinguished.</p> <p>5. Where it is shown that a witness whose deposition was read upon a former trial, between the same parties upon the same subject-matter, though residing in the county is aged and infirm, the admission of the deposition in the action for mesne profits is subject to the lawful discretion of the trial judge.</p>

No. 142 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 91 April Term 1887, C. P. On March 21, 1887, J. J. Greenhoe, and Jacob Greenhoe and Elizabeth Greenhoe, his wife, for the use of said wife, brought trover and conversion against Jacob College, Henry Reinhard and George Reinhard. Issue.

Nos. 248, 249, 250 January Term 1891, and 18 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 1 March Term 1887, C. P. On March 9, 1888, Campbell & Dick, unsecured creditors having a claim against the assigned estate of M. H. Mathews, doing buisness as M. H. Mathews & Co., caused a citation to issue to J. D. Armstrong, assignee.

No. 385 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 347 June Term 1888, C. P. On June 4, 1888, an appeal was entered from the judgment of a justice of the peace for $108.83, in favor of Abraham Lay-ton against John'H. Davidson. Issue. At the trial, on September 11, 1890, the plaintiff testified that he was a carpenter, and did work for W. S. Strickler, the contractor for the building of a church at Perryopolis, completed in the fall of 1887.

No. 92 July Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, Equity Docket No. 2, page 271, C. P. in Equity. After the opinion was filed in Groff’s App., 128 Pa. 621, the petition of the defendant company, joined in by nine other turnpike companies, was filed, praying for a re-argument of the cause; whereupon, on May 7, 1890, an order was made for a re-argument before a full bench.

No. 88 January Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 58 May Term 1888, C. P. On May 4,1888, an appeal was entered from the judgment of a justice of the peace for $206.11 in favor of the Conestoga Cigar Co. against “Charles Finke & Co., F. Sehroeder and J. C. Irwin, agents,” the plaintiff tiling a statement of claim as follows: “ The claim or statement of demand of the plaintiff above is founded on a contract whereby the defendants, being inspectors of leaf tobacco and having…

No. 139 January Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 37 April Term 1889, E. D., C. P. On March. 10, 1888, judgment was entered in open court in favor of Mary J. Boyd, to the use of John T.… Held: that the defendant had the statutory right to demand any reasonable number of additional advertisements, to be disposed of at his own discretion, if he had thought such a demand to be expedient.

No. 97 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 58 June Term 1887, C. P. On June 7,1887, Monroe Keener, administrator of the estate of Emanuel Keener, deceased, brought assumpsit against David Zartman, administrator of the estate of David Zartma'n, deceased. The plaintiff’s statement of claim was not printed in the paper-books. The defendant pleaded, non-assumpsit, nonassumpsit infra sex annos, payment, and set-off.

No. 24 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown. J. L. Steinmetz and Mortimer Malone, executors of the will of James M. Burke, deceased, settled an account which was referred to Mr. Simon P. JUby, as auditor for distribution.

No. 25 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 46 December Term 1889, Q. S. On January 25, 1889, the grand jury returned as a true bill an indictment charging Charles E. Bird, William Ruth, William Heberling and others with conspiracy to defraud. On June 7th, the indictment being tried, the jury returned a verdict that the defendants were guilty as indicted. On November 16th, a rule for a new trial was discharged.

No. 302 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown.

No. 886 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 12 April Term 1889,. C. P. On January 21, 1889, Eliza J. Bollinger issued capias in trespass against John Gallagher and John P. Johns, filing a statement of claim alleging the unlawful seizure and sale of chattels of the plaintiff by John Gallagher, upon the advice, order, direction, and authority of John P. Johns. The defendants pleaded not guilty.

No. 116 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 22 November Term 1889, E. D., C. P. On November 16, 1889, by virtue of a writ of fieri facias at tbe suit of Elizabeth D. Koeehling, the sheriff sold certain real estate as the property of Barbara Henkel; and on January 30, 1890, the proceeds of the sale, $921.37, having been paid into court, Mr. Redmond Oonyngham was appointed auditor to make distribution.

No. 123 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 53 December Term 1887, C. P. On December 19, 1887, an appeal was entered by tbe defendant from the judgment of a justice of the peace in favor of Joseph Sondheimer against Moses B. Hoover.

No. 237 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 83 August Term 1884, C. P. In July 17, 1884, Margaret Shaffer, administratrix of the estate of Francis Shaffer, deceased, brought assumpsit against Adam Spangler, to recover certain moneys collected by the defendant upon two insurance policies on the life of said deceased.

No. 323 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 9 January Term 1890, C. P. On November 2, 1889, an appeal was entered by tbe defendant from tbe judgment of a justice of the peace in favor of Michael Becker against the Berlin Beneficial Society. Issue.

No. 360 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, Equity Docket No. 2, page 326 C. P. On June 16,1888, Joseph McYey, president, and D. S. Hicks, Frank Gastiger and H. Brownstetter, trustees of the Cigar Makers’ Union, No. 126, of Ephrata, Pa., filed a bill in equity for themselves and for all other members of the Cigar Makers’ International Union of America, against John H. Brendel, praying for an injunction to restrain the defendant from using, upon boxes of cigars to be…

No. 425 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 56 August Term 1889, C. P. On June 18, 1890, John Neely brought assumpsit against John Bair, filing, on August 13th, a statement of claim in substance averring: That on June 26, 1884, the plaintiff, as administrator of Thomas Neely, deceased, sold and delivered to the defendant one black horse, of the price and value of $425 ; and one top wagon or buggy, one buggy tongue, and one set of double harness, together of the…

No. 432 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown. On February 1, 1888, William Heppenstall, surviving executor of the will of John Heppenstall, deceased, filed his account showing a balance for distribution of $4,926.76, being almost entirely the proceeds of real estate sold. Exceptions having been filed to said account, Mr. Richard JE. Qoehran was appointed auditor to hear and determine .the same and to report distribution.

No. 9 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 88 August Term 1890, C. P. In July, 1890, Joseph W. Sweigert brought trespass against Lysander W. Finley, the sheriff of York county, to recover damages for the seizure and sale of plaintiff’s property, on an execution in favor of Samuel Hay against William Lesh. Issue.

No 26 July Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 37 June * Term 1890, C. P. On June 3, 1890, David G. Eshleman brought assumpsit against Robert M. Bolenius, filing a statement of claim averring in substance as follows : That letters of administration upon the estate of John H. Harman, late of Baltimore county, Md., deceased, were issued to Daniel M. Harman of said Baltimore county, on October 16, 1883, by the register of wills of Lancaster county, Pa.; that, on the same day,…

No. 87 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not stated. On February 5,1891, George Beiler filed in the court below his petition, averring that he was a creditor of the estate of Joel L. Lightner, deceased, and praying for a citation against M. Juliette Lightner, executrix of said deceased, to settle an account. A citation having been awarded and issued, the respondent filed an answer, whereupon the petitioner filed a replication.

No. 65 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 17 August Term 1891, C. P. To tbe number and term stated of the court below, Catharine Snyder brought ejectment against Jacob H. Baer, executor of the will of Anna Shaffer, deceased, for a lot of ground in the city of York.

No. 395 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 30 September Term 1890, C. P. On August 30, 1890, Benjamin Good and others, heirs at law of Solomon Good, deceased, brought ejectment against Richard Fichthorn and others, heirs at law of Isabella Good, deceased, to recover an undivided one half of a certain lot of ground on the south side of Main street, in the borough of Adamstown. Issue.

No. 462 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown. On March 20,1886, John H. Small filed his account as guardian of J. Etter Small, a minor, showing a balance in favor of the ward of $30,811.89. On April 24th, there was filed on behalf of the ward, inter alia, the following exceptions: “ 3.

No. 4 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 40 April Term 1890, C. P. On February 6,1890, John N. Logan commenced a proceeding before an alderman against Henry G. Eva, under §§ 105-118, act of June 16, 1836, P. L. 780, to obtain possession of a tract of land in Carroll township.

Nos. 5, 6 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown.

No. 28 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 5 December Term 1887, C. P. On November 16, 1887, Elias McMellen brought trespass against the Union News Company. Subsequently the name of Annie E. McMellen, wife of Elias McMellen, was added as a plaintiff by amendment. Issue.

No. 41 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 21 February Term 1890, C. P. On January 25, 1890, James Dunlap issued capias in trespass against John A. Linton, for… Held: that in an action by a parent for the seduction of a daughter, evidence of a prior promise of marriage is inadmissible; inasmuch as such promise, and a breach of it, are the subjects of an action by the daughter herself. In this action, the father, suing for damages, may prove the value of her services.

<p>No. 81 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 3 August Term 1889, C. P.</p> <p>On April 11, 1889, Andrew Hartman and Nancy M. Hartman brought trespass against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Issue.</p> <p>At the trial, on April 18, 1890, the case presented was in substance as follows: On the morning of May 29,1888, it was noticed that one of the upright standards used with the shunting pole of a shifting engine, at the Harrisburg yards of the defendant company, was in bad condition, and the engine was sent to the shops to have the standard repaired. The shunting appliance consisted of two uprights or standards inserted in iron sockets placed in the frame on the rear of the tender, one on each side or corner. Each standard was a little over four feet high. When in position, the foot of each standard rested in the socket upon a shoulder, and through the socket there was a pin-hole, for the insertion of a pin as a fastening. There was testimony however that the pin had not been used for a long time, as it tended to weaken the tenon of the standard, which had a downward bearing sufficient to keep it in position. Each standard was braced to the body of the tender by chains. To each one there was a shunting pole, which when not in use was swung back alongside the tender. When in use, however, the pole was carried around in front of the tender as it was backing, and, suspended by chains from the standard, extended from the frame of the tender to the bottom-frame of the car on the adjoining track, and was so managed by a lever handled by a brakeman, standing on a foot-board in front of the tender, that its far end was inserted and held in a socket on the frame of the car to be pushed into position. The bottom frame of the car being moved was a little higher than the frame of the tender, at the point against which the pole rested, so that if the pole was not carefully managed when in place against the car to be moved, it might run under the car and cause an accident.</p> <p>The car was returned from the shop with the standard repaired. About seven o’clock in the evening of the day mentioned, the plaintiffs’ son, James Hartman, a brakeman in the employment of the defendant company, went on duty with the shifting engine, to move freight1 cars. When last seen before the accident, he was standing on the foot-board, in his proper position, leaning over with the lever in his hands, shunting a car. When the car had received enough momentum, the engineer put on the brakes and reversed his engine. Immediately afterward, there was a jarring or bumping of the tender, when the fireman ran forward and found Hartman under the fore truck of the tender, and the shunting rigging partly under the car and partly on the ground outside. The standard, it was claimed by the plaintiffs, had either jumped out of the socket, or had broken off. It was alleged that there was negligence in the defendant company in three matters: 1. That the key intended to be put through the socket and the foot of the standard had been carelessly left out. 2. That tin bushing or filling had been placed around the standard before it was put into place, causing a friction which made the standard work out. 3. That the standard was an old one, or of improper wood.</p> <p>The case being closed on the evidence, the court, Barnett, P. J., on request of the defendant, instructed the jury that there was not sufficient evidence to warrant the submission of the question of the defendant’s negligence, and directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant. A verdict for the defendant having been returned and judgment entered, the plaintiffs took this appeal, assigning the instruction to find for the defendant for error.</p>

No. 92 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 251 September Term 1883, C. P. On July 25, 1883, Daniel Kehler, by his father and next friend, Charles Z. Kehler, brought ease for negligence against William Schwenk, George Robertson and Jacob Geise, trading as Schwenk, Robertson & Co., to recover damages for injuries sustained by the legal plaintiff, a minor, while working at the defendant’s colliery. Issue.

No. 298 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 16 August Term 1890, C. P. On April 22,1889, proceedings were commenced in the Court of Quarter Sessions of Juniata county, under the act of May 8, 1876, P. L. 131, and its supplements, for the taking, as a county bridge, of a wooden bridge erected and maintained by the Mifflin bridge company over the Juniata river, at Mifflin in said county, by virtue of an act of incorporation approved March 5, 1828, P. L. 152, and for…

No. 401 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown. On May 31,1888, Catharine Woomer, and Catharine Miller, children of Frederick Spath, deceased, both having become of age, filed exceptions to the several accounts of their guardian, J. W. Fryling, filed August 3, 1875, March 16, 1878, and April 7, 1888, respectively, the first two accounts having been filed during the exceptants’ minority.

No. 440 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 43 August Term 1890, C. P. On May 10,1890, the Mifflin County National Bank brought assumpsit against A. R. W. Thompson. Issue.

Nos. 441, 442, 443 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, Nos. 59, 60, 61 September Term 1889, C. P. On January 19, 1889, four judgments were entered in the court below to Nos. 58, 59, 60 and 61 September Term 1889, in favor of tbe Wheeler & Wilson Manufacturing Co. against Mary J. Landis and Lyman Augbey, upon judgment notes under seal signed by the defendants, bearing date June 17,1889, each for the sum of ®220.78, at four, eight, twelve, and sixteen months…

No. 49 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No; 184 February Term 1890, C. P. On January 15, 1890, P. A. Mahon and Kate Mahon, his wife, in right of said Kate Mahon, brought assumpsit against the Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company of California, upon a policy of insurance issued by the defendant company upon the life of Mary Doyle. The defendant pleaded nonassumpsit.

No. 430 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 41 August Term 1890, Q. S. On August 19, 1890, tbe grand jury returned as a true bill an indictment charging Jose M. Ribert with an aggravated assault and battery upon the person of Henry E. Osborne. Issue.

No. 410 January Term. 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 19 March Term 1890, C. P. On January 4,1890, W. H. Thompson brought ejectment against W. D. Ridelsperger, L. M. Ridelsperger, H. P. Ridelsperger and C. H. Shurmer, for a lot of land described in the prtecipe by posts, courses and distances, and as containing three acres, more or less, and known as lot No. 58, subdivision of lot No. 528. Issue.

No 205 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 286 Octob.er- T.ey_m .1883, 0. Ct ■ — On May 15, 1890, the second account of the Pennsylvania Company for Insurances on Lives and Granting Annuities, executor of the will of Thomas Smith, deceased, was called for audit in the court below, before Ashman, J. The subject of . the account was a fund composed of $13,000 in coupon bonds of the Pensacola & Atlantic Railroad Company, and interest collected thereon.

No. 126 January Term 1891, court below, No. 389 April Term 1887, 0. 0. Held: was void. The auditing judge, citing Neale’s App., 104 Pa. 214, and Hildeburn’s Est., 8 Pa.

<p>1. In an action for a loss by fire, caused by sparks from a locomotive engine of a railroad company, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that the fire was communicated by some engine of the defendant company, and also to prove negligence in the construction or management of the engine; such facts, however, may be established by circumstantial evidence.</p> <p>2. When the fire is shown to have been caused, or, in the nature of the case could only have been caused, by sparks from an engine which is known and identified, the evidence should be confined to the condition, management and practical operation of that engine; and testimony tending to prove defects in other engines of the company is irrelevant and inadmissible.</p> <p>3. If, however, the offending engine is not clearly or satisfactorily identified, it is competent for the plaintiff to prove, in support of the allegation that the fire was caused by defendant’s negligence, that the defendant’s locomotives generally, or many of them, at or about th.e time of the occurrence, threw sparks of unusual size causing numerous fires on that part of its road.</p> <p>4. This class of testimony is exceptional in character at the best, and is admissible only because direct evidence is impracticable; the examination, therefore, should be confined to the negligent operation of the engines at and about the time of the fire, with such reasonable latitude, before and after the occurrence, as is sufficient to make such proofs practicable.</p> <p>5. Wherefore, it was error in this case to admit an offer to show the repeated emission of sparks of unusual size by defendant’s engines, during a period of six months preceding the fire, and also a similar offer, . unlimited as to time, under which testimony was received covering periods of two, three and six months, and other testimony not indicating the time to which it referred.</p>

No. 236 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 862 Marcb Term 1888, C. P. in Equity.

No. 233 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not shown. On October 13,1890, the account of Henry W. Scott, guardian of William W. Law, a minor, was called for audit before Ashman, J., when a credit was claimed by the accountant for the sum of $3,339.12. The allowance of the credit was objected to by the Commonwealth Title Insurance & Trust Company, substituted guardian of said minor.

No. 43 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 151 December Term 1887, C. P. On October 19, 1887, Bernard Gallagher brought trespass against M. S. Kemmerer and John Leisenring, Jr., doing business as M. S.-Kemmerer & Co., to recover damages for injuries to the plaintiff’s land, by washings cast upon it from anthracite-coal mines operated by the defendants upon their own land above. Issue.

No. 437 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 69 December Term 1889, C. P. On November 21,1889, Charles C. Duffield brought trespass against Louis Rosenzweig, filing a statement of claim setting out in its first count a certain lease for oil purposes, executed on January 20, 1882, by Thomas and Henry W. Brown to F. M. Pratt, shown in the decision of the court below, and proceeding : “ That, by the terms of said lease, said Pratt and his assigns became bound to drill…

No. 23 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court'below, No. 22 February Term 1890, C. P. On January 28, 1890, a case stated was filed wherein the New Holland Turnpike Road Company was plaintiff, and the Farmers’ Mutual Insurance Co. of Lancaster county was defendant, setting forth that the plaintiff and defendant were legally constituted corporations, and proceeding : “ 2.

No 35 July Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 36 March Term 1891, C. P. On March 7,1891, a case stated was filed wherein the Commonwealth was plaintiff, and Solomon Teller and others, trading as Teller Brothers, were defendants, setting forth: “ That the defendants, in the above case, have been assessed by the mercantile appraiser of the county of Lancaster, for the year 1890, under the act of assembly of April 22, 1846, for the payment of a license of seven dollars as…

No. 129 July Term, 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 57 September Term 1885, C. P. On May 22, 1885, James H. Ferguson brought ejectment against Matthew Bloom and others, his tenants, to recover a parcel of land containing 19 acres and 88 perches, in Ferguson township. Issue. At the trial on May 15, 1888, a verdict was returned for the plaintiff.

No. 448 January Term 1887, Sup. Ct:; court below, number and term not shown. On June 19, 1885, “ Susanna Light and Reuben L. Light, her husband, for the use of said Susanna Light,” brought ejectment against Daniel W. Zeller, to recover a lot of ground in the village of Ebenezer. Issue.

No. 449 January Term 1887, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 45 April Term 1886, C. P. On February 9, 1886, “ Susanna Light and Reuben L. Light, her husband, for the use of said • Susanna,” brought ejectment against Daniel W. Zeller and John H. Bixler (a tenant perhaps), to recover a tract of land containing-123 acres, 64.7 perches in North Lebanon township. Issue.

No. 128 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 218 January Term 1887, C. P. On December 18, 1886, S. D. Kingsley and others brought ejectment against the Hillside Coal & Iron Company, for the coal underlying certain lands in Blakely borough. The defendant pleaded not guilty.

No. 258 January Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 228 November Term 1887, C. P. On November 5, 1887, John P. Jones filed a petition praying for the appointment of viewers, to assess damages for the location and construction of the railroad of the Erie & Wyoming Valley Railroad Company, upon a lot owned by him situated in the city of Scranton.

No. 842 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 29 December Term 1887, C. P. On November 7,1887, David J. Jones filed a petition for the appointment of viewers to assess damages for a change in the grade of Pennsylvania Avenue, in the borough of Bangor. Thereupon, the court appointed viewers, who afterward reported awarding the plaintiff $110 damages.