Volume 31 — Iowa Reports

Action upon a promissory note executed by defendant to Warder, Mitchell & Oo., and bearing the following indorsement: “For value received we hereby guarantee payment of the within note, and waive demand and notice of nonpayment thereof.

Action on an alleged contract for the sale of hogs. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The necessary facts are stated in the opinion.

The treasurer of Johnson county seized a package of United States and national bank bills, the property of plaintiff, for the payment of taxes assessed upon the shares of the stockholders, for the year 1868. The plain.tift replevied. Trial before the judge of the first circuit, eighth judicial district, and judgment for plaintiff. ■ Appeal to general term, where judgment of circuit court was affirmed. Defendant appeals.

Injunction granted upon petition, and on the trial made perpetual. Defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

The plaintiff commenced an action without petition, before a justice of the peace, claiming of the defendant the sum of $95. The defendant filed answer in general denial, and claiming $98.80, as a set-off. The cause was tried before Justice McCarter, on tbe 11th day of December, 1869, and on the 14th day of December judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant for $46. From this judgment the plaintiff appealed to the circuit court.

On the 13th day of June, 1870, Morgan L. Bennett, the husband of Harriet L. Bennett, filed an information before a justice of the peace of Linn county against the defendants, charging them with the crime of adultery. At the July term of the Linn district court, an indictment was returned against them for said crime. The defendants each pleaded not guilty, and demanded separate trials.

This was an ordinary action on a promissory note made April 8, 1856, by Charles D. Gage and J. H. West, for $150, payable to Susan F. Smith, or bearer, on the first day of June, 1856.

Action in chancery. The petition represents that plaintiff is the owner of lot 1, block 5, and lot 8, in block 4, situate upon Main street, in the city of Lyons; that on the 14th day of May, 1867, certain ordinances were passed by the city requiring Main street, or the part thereof upon which the plaintiff’s lots are located, to be graded, macadamized, and gutters along the same to be constructed by the owners of the lots abutting upon the street so improved; that by another…

<p> Appeal from Lee Circuit Court. </p> <p>Action in equity to foreclose a mortgage made by defendant to plaintiff, upon tbe easterly half of lot 4, block 65, city of Keokuk, to secure a note given in part consideration of its purchase. Tbe defendant claims a set-off for $656.70, for that plaintiff conveyed said lot to him with covenants of warranty against incumbrances, etc.; and at tbe time of sale and conveyance there was a large brick building, known as the Estes House, standing on tbe adjoining lots, 1, 2 and 3, with one-half the westerly wall thereof on lot 4, having been so constructed under the laws of Iowa respecting partition walls; that the same became a lien or claim on lot 4, and was so at the time of said conveyance ; that since his purchase the defendant had built on lot 4, and used the westerly wall of the Estes House in constructing his building; and said half-wall never having been paid for by plaintiff, the defendant had been compelled by suit to pay therefor the sum of $656.70, which he pleads as a set-off for breach of warranty, etc. To this part of the answer the plaintiff demurred, because the facts stated did not constitute a set-off, nor an incumbrance, nor damage. The circuit court overruled the demurrer; the plaintiff stood thereon, and judgment was rendered for plaintiff for the amount due, less the set-off. The plaintiff appeals.</p>

Action by ordinary proceedings to recover- money alleged to have been collected by defendant, as-, attorney for the plaintiffs upon a claim left in his hands for collection. The cause was tried to the court, which found generally for the ' plaintiff in the sum of $350.41, and rendered judgment accordingly. The defendant appeals.

Action m equity to enforce a conveyance of the E. •§■ N. W. ¿, section 9, township 87 N., range 1 west. Decree for plaintiff, from which he appeals. The necessary facts are stated in the opinion. 1. Lane being Ryan’s agent could not acquire any interest in the land or notes adverse to Ryan. Whatever interest he may have acquired he held in trust for Ryan.

On the 1st day of January, 1867, the defendants, John Mally and wife, executed to plaintiff a mortgage upon the N. E. quarter of section M, and the S. E. quartervof the S. E, quarter of section 24, town. 97, range 9, to secure the sum of $3,800. Subsequently satisfaction of this mortgage was entered upon the record, and a mortgage, dated February 18, 1870, was executed on the same property to secure the said sum of $3,800, together with the further sum of $1,320.

Action of right for the possession of the N. E. J S. W. J section thirty-one, township sixty-eight, range thirty-four. Answer, denial of plaintiff’s title, and a claim of title in defendants under a treasurer’s deed. Trial by the court on an agreed statement of facts; judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal.

The plaintiff instituted this proceeding under chapter 55 of the Revision, to condemn certain land for a ferry landing. He shows in his petition that he is the proprietor of a licensed ferry, that defendants are riparian owners, and that a portion of their land is necessary for the operation of his ferry, and asks that the same may be condemned for that purpose.

Ajpjjeal from Lee Cvrouit Cov/rt. As a cause of action the petition avers that plaintiff deposited, in the First National Bank of Keokuk, $é00 in 7:30 United States bonds, to be converted into 5:20 six per cent United States securities; that the bonds being worth a premium of ten per centum were of the value of $4A0; that plaintiff demanded the return of one or the other class of bonds of the receiver of the bank, which was refused, and that the conversion of United States…

The appellant was road supervisor of the district in which appellee resided. He notified appellee to work on the roads under sections 902 and 903 of the Revision. The defendant not being an able-bodied man did not obey the call of the supervisor but sent a boy, who was rejected. This action was brought by appellant before a justice of the peace to recover the penalty of ten dollars from the appellee for disobeying the notice to work on the highway.

Action upon a judgment purporting to have been rendered by the prothonotary of a court of record of the State of Pennsylvania, April 9, 1850, upon a promissory note dated April 8, 1850, and payable April 1, 1855.

<p>Appeal from Black Hawk District Court.</p> <p>Action in chancery. Decree for plaintiff; defendant Thompson appeals.</p>

■ Action upon a promissory note given in consideration of a flock of sheep. Defense, a counterclaim, based upon an alleged breach of warranty of soundness. Trial by the court. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The necessary facts are stated in the opinion. ■

The plaintiffs filed in the Decatur district court a petition alleging that they mortgaged the S. E. \ of S. E. J of section 10, township 69, range 25, to Elanor Allbee, to secure the payment of $240. That W. W. Ellis, as the agent of Allbee, filed a petition asking the foreclosure of said mortgage. That judgment was rendered on said note for $298.80, and a special execution awarded. That Ellis and James, acting as a firm, had execution issued.

On. the 22d day of April, 1868, Hoyt Sherman, was the ownér of lots 5 and 6 in block 12 in' the city of Des Moines. These lots originally surveyed and platted were each 66 feet wide on Sixth street, runing west' 132 feet to an alley. Lot 5 was a corner lot, with a frontage of 66 feet on Sixth street and 132 feet on Walnut street. Lot 6 was the same size, with an alley along the north side.

Action upon an alleged subscription of $500 to tbe stock of plaintiff; jury trial; verdict and judgment for tbe plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion.

This action is brought to recover certain license fees and • assessments levied under the ordinances of the city of Burlington. A demurrer to the petition was sustained. Plaintiff appeals.

<p> Appeal from Jefferson District Court. </p> <p>In chancery. Plaintiff in this action asks that a marriage celebrated between herself and defendant may be declared void, and be annulled by proper decree, on account of fraud practiced by defendant upon her in procuring her consent to become his wife. Upon the trial in the district court the facts found by the judge to whom the cause .was submitted are set out in the record in the following words: “ Be it remembered that, on the trial of this cause, the following facts were proved: that on Sunday, about the last of July, 1869, defendant, then a stranger to plaintiff, came to plaintiff’s house, in Libertyville, Jefferson county, Iowa, where she had been residing and keeping house for herself ahd one child for about eight or nine years; that he represented to plaintiff -that he had been referred and recommended to plaintiff' by her acquaintances and friends; that after conversing some time he proposed to make further visits to plaintiff, saying she had been recommended to him as a suitable person for a wife, and that plaintiff told defendant that she could not consent to have him visit her, as he was an entire stranger (she had learned his name at that time but never saw him before). He said to her that he was a man of good character and good standing in society, and that he had many respectable relations and connections, and that he could give her any reference she might clesire. In a day or two he called again and made the same representations as to being a man of good moral character and of good standing in society, and that she need have no fears as to being imposed on by him; that he had plenty of means, and could and would maintain her and educate her child well, and proposed that he should get the license for the marriage. Plaintiff objected that she did not know him, and that she could not or would not consent unless she counseled with her mother. On Thursday, the Jth day of August, 1869, he came to plaintiff’s house with buggy and team, and a license to marry plaintiff, and plaintiff accompanied defendant to her mother’s house, still not having given her consent ; and that while at her mother’s the defendant made the same representations as to his being a man of good character, and that plaintiff believed, from his representations, that he was a man of good standing and good character ; that a justice of the peace was sent for and the marriage ceremony performed; that the parties started to the residence of plaintiff, and that plaintiff felt badly about the transaction, and on reaching home told defendant to leave ; that he left, and that in a day or two he returned. In the mean time, plaintiff having learned something of his true character, she refused him admittance to her house; that the parties never lived or cohabited together at all; and that defendant was a convict of the penitentiary and had. served three terms in the penitentiary of Iowa, and had been released from serving but a short time before this marriage took place, all of which was unknown to plaintiff at the time.”</p> <p>Upon these facts, the court dismissed plaintiff’s petition, and from this decision she appeals.</p>

Action upon, a promissory note signed by the defendant, of which the following is a copy: “ January 1st, 1860. $U4.84.

Action for money, hardware, etc., belonging to plaintiff and held by defendant in his possession and control, and by him wrongfully appropriated and converted to his own .use. The petition asked an attachment, and an order was indorsed thereon by the circuit judge, allowing property to the amount in value of $3,000 to be attached thereon. The defendant moved for a more specific statement of the cause of action in the petition, and also to dissolve the attachment.

Action by the eity of Keokuk upon the official bond, as city treasurer, given by H.. K. Love, as principal, and 0. K. Peck and thirteen others, as his sureties. The sureties deny, the claim of plaintiff/and rely upon certain matters by way of set-off.

Appellant filed his petition in equity, stating his cause of action as follows: “ 1. That he was the legal owner of the N. -| of the N. V. ¿ of section 34, T. 100, N. of R. 11, 'W. of the 5th P. M. “2. That the same was assessed for the year 1862 in separate forties and the tax extended separately thereon. “ 3.

Plaintiff sued as a bona fide holder of a promissory note in the following form: “August 20th, 1868. “ On or before the 20th day of August, 1869, for value received, the subscribers of Sweetland township, county of Muscatine and State of Iowa, promise to pay to A. Ingalls or bearer one hundred and twenty dollars, it being given for the -profits on (4) machines, with interest at ten per cent per annum.

On the 3d day of April, 1869, the plaintiff filed in the Muscatine circuit court her petition, alleging: “ That, in October, 1866, she purchased, by verbal contract of defendant, for $500, the west one-half of lot 4, block 151, in Muscatine, Iowa, and paid thereon, at that date, one cow, valued at $50, and $10 in cash, and immediately took possession; that she paid defendant, on said purchase, the further sum of $150, November 24, 1866, and the further sum of $40 July…

The plaintiff filed in the Des Moines circuit court a petition aEeging that -fie was seized and possessed of the N. W. ^ of S. E. l¡ section 20, township 72, range 3, and the W. % of N. E. section 29, township 72, range 3. That the defendant broke and entered said close, and broke down and removed the fences, etc. That the defendant cut down eighty rods of osage orange hedge adjoining . plaintiff’s close, and deposited the rubbish on plaintiff’s premises.

The plaintiff, in Ms petition, claims the return, or, at his option, the value of one hundred and sixty-four bushels of corn, worth fifty cents a bushel, which defendant took from him under execution against J. W. Berry and J. R. Witmer, but not against plaintiff, who is absolute owner of it, by purchase from them prior to the levy. He asks that his petition be considered an action of detinue.

Proceedings for partition. The plaintiffs are the children and heirs at law of Hutchinson Middleton, deceased. The defendant, Ida E., is the only child and heir, and the defendant Joanna is the widow ofVm. B. Middleton, deceased, who died before his father, and was a son of Hutchinson Middleton, deceased, and brother to plaintiffs.

Action in equity to correct a mistake in the description of the property, conveyed by a deed, executed by plaintiff to John Furnas, and by him sold and conveyed to the defendant, Isaiah Hixon. Judgment was for plaintiff, and the defendants appeal.

Action of replevin. Thomas G. Ryan & -Co. became intervenors, claiming the ownership of the goods replevied. Plaintiff dismissed the action. Upon application of defendants it was retained • upon the 'docket for .the assessment of damages in their favor, should they show themselves entitled thereto. Ira B. Ryan and Thomas G. Ryan & Co. jointly ask judgment for the value of the property replevied; the same is asked for by Ira B. Ryan alone.

The defendants were warehousemen and dealers in grain in tbe town of DekVitt, Clinton county, Iowa, under tbe firm name of G. W. Byrne & Co. Tbe plaintiff, in the months of February and March, 1869, placed two hundred and twenty-one and thirty one-hundredth bushels of Canada Club wheat and three hundred and ninety-three and ninety one-hundredth bushels of Mediterranean wheat in store with defendants.

The original petition in this case was filed, and this action commenced, on the 22d day of September, 1865. A substituted petition, the original having been lost, was afterward filed.

This action was commenced before a justice of the peace on a promissory note. The defendant pleaded payment. The cause was tried and judgment rendered by the justice for. plaintiff, on the 15th day of December, 1868, and on the same day defendant appealed.

Replevin for certain rails and stakes of the value of $216. Judgment for defendant for the value of the property replevied. Plaintiff appeals.

This proceeding was commenced in the district court of Polk county, by the petitioners, under the provisions of sections 1048, 1049, 1050, 1051,1052,1053,1054 and 1055 of the Revision of 1860, praying that certain territory described in their petition be severed from and stricken out of the corporate limits of the city of Des Moines.

Action to recover damage resulting from fire upon plaintiff’s land, caused by tbe alleged negligence of defendant’s servants and tbe careless and improper construction of an engine used upon defendant’s road. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals.

This action was brought on a promissory note, made by the defendants to the plaintiff, for $441, with interest.

Action upon a written contract set out in the opinion. Defense in denial of indebtedness thereon. Trial to a referee who found and reported the facts, with which both' parties are content; and also reported his conclusion of law thereon, that plaintiff was entitled to judgment for $400 and interest, to which defendant excepted. The report was made the judgment of the district court, and therefrom the defendant appeals.

Action to recover a statute penalty and overcharges paid on merchandise transported upon defendant’s railroad. Held: that an article authorized by law of congress to be imported, continued to be a part of the foreign commerce of the country while it remained in the hands of the importer, and that no State could, directly or indirectly, vmpose any burden upon the importer or the property imported beyond what the law of congress had imposed; that he…

Action by plaintiff against defendant as a railway com-' pany; brought under chapter 169 of the acts of 1862, claiming the penalties prescribed by that act for overcharges upon several shipments of goods from Chicago to Marshalltown over defendant’s road, in 1868. The petition also seeks to recover back the alleged overcharges, and also penalties for failing to post rates of freight ■ charges as required by the act above referred to. The defendant pleaded three defenses: 1.

On tbe 19th day of February, A. D. 1866, Mary L. Miller, through her husband, James A. Miller, made an application to the Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company for a policy of insurance upon the life of her said husband, as follows, to wit: “I, Mary L. Miller, wife of James A. Miller, of Le Claire, in the county of Scott, in the State of Iowa, being desirous of eifecting an assurance with the Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company, in the sum of fire thousand dollars, upon…

Action on two promissory notes given for profits on “Ingalls’ improved seeder and cultivator,” payable to Alfred Ingalls or bearer, for $120 each. Plaintiff claims to have purchased the notes from a third party before maturity for value, without notice of any infirmities therein. Defendant answered denying the execution of the notes. Jury trial. Verdict for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

Action to foreclose mortgage. Trial to tbe court who found the following facts: 1st. That, April 29, 1857, George Brokaw obtained a judgment in this court against Charles Foster for $119.77 debt, to draw interest at ten per cent, and $5.05 Gosts. 2d. That, about January 1, 1858, the said Foster delivered to the said Brokaw a car load of coal in part payment of said judgment, but no credit was ever entered upon the record thereof, and the judgment appeared wholly unsatisfied.

Agypeal from Keolcuh Cvreuit Court. The plaintiff filed in the Keokuk circuit court his petition, claiming of Anna M. Besser, as administratrix of the estate of John Shiltz, deceased, compensation for boarding, lodging, and in other respects providing for Frank Shiltz, son of the said John Shiltz, for a period from the 1st day of March, 1858, to the 1st day of March, 1869, under a parol contract between the said John Shiltz and Andreas Wendeling, whereby John Shiltz agreed…

Petition for injunction, stating that on the 3d day of December, 1866, certain lands in Audubon county were sold by the county treasurer for delinquent taxes of 1865; purchased by Thacker & Stotts, and certificates issued to them thereon; that in April, 1868, said certificates were duly assigned to the plaintiff; that on the 25th day of January, 1870, Charles Van Gorder, as treasurer of said county, deeded to the plaintiff, the holder of said certificates, the lands so sold…

Action to recover double the value of a partition fence, built by plaintiff upon the line between his lands and defendant’s, and assigned by the fence viewers, under Revision, section 1533, to be built by defendant within a time fixed hy them. Upon defendant’s failing to build, according to the decision of the fence viewers, plaintiff erected the fence and sues for double the value thereof. The facts necessary to an understanding of the points ruled are stated in the opinion.

Suit upon a judgment rendered by the circuit court’ of Hancock county, Illinois, for the sum of $1,145.31.

Action for the foreclosure of a mortgage executed by John Luscombe, Jr., t.o tbe plaintiff. John Brown claims to be tbe owner in fee of tbe land by a conveyance from John Luscombe, Sr. Trial by tbe court and judgment for defendant Brown. Plaintiff appeals. Tbe farther facts are stated in tbe opirnon.

The defendant Harris was elected to the office of county judge of Jasper county for two years from January 1, 1861. In qualifying for the office, he executed and filed a bond, with Thomson and the other defendants as his securities, which was duly approved, and thereupon he entered npon the discharge of the duties of the office.

On the 23d day of November, 1869, the plaintiff filed in the Wapello district court a petition for divorce from the defendant, alleging that he had been guilty of various acts of such inhuman treatment as to endanger her life. The original notice was not served on the defendant until the 17th day of August, 1870.

Action to foreclose a mortgage executed by N. B. Church to II.- E. Dally, dated May 5, 1869, making the mortgagor and D. W. Church, E. M. Burke, H. W. Kinney and S. Kinney parties defendants. The original notice was returnable at the May term, 1870, and on the 17th day of May, during said term, a default was entered against D. ~W. Church, and the cause continued as to N. B. Church, the mortgagor, for service of notice.

The plaintiffs filed, in the Louisa district court, their' petition, claiming the sum of $55,000, alleged to be due ’ on thirty-two promissory notes executed by defendants and one McCreery, under the firm name of McCreery, Ream & Kent.

Action m equity by the plaintiff to establish his right to inherit, as illegitimate son and heir at law, the estate of Sylvanus B. .Crane, Sr., deceased. The- defendants are the administrators, the wddow and the brothers of said Crane, Sr., deceased. Upon the trial, which was by the first method, the district court found the following facts: 1.

Action in chancery. Defendant Eliza is the wife of George Burden, another defendant. The petition sets out a cause of action against both, and shows that Eliza has an interest in the matter in litigation in her own right, claiming independent and distinct relief against her by the way of an adjustment of an unsettled account and the conveyance of real property.

The facts of this case are as follows: On the 26th day of November, 1861, Mrs. Amalie Eriedlander, mother of plaintiffs, procured a policy of insurance on the life of her husband, Herman Eriedlander, in the Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance'Company, for the sum of $5,000.

The defendant was indicted for tbe crime of willfully and maliciously burning tbe barn of one Samuel Ross, in tbe nigbt-time. Upon trial tbe defendant was found guilty, and was sentenced to imprisonment in tbe penitentiary for one year. He appeals.

Action in chancery to set aside'and declare void the title to certain lands based upon a sheriff’s sale and deed. The judgment upon which the lands were sold was rendered in an action wherein the court acquired jurisdiction by the service of notice by publication. An attachment was issued and the lands afterward sold were attached. The action was commenced in 1859.

On tbe 2d day of April, 1868, tbe plaintiff filed in tbe Lncas district court, a petition, stating that, on tbe 18tb day of March, 1868, be purchased certain real estate at a sheriff’s sale, by virtue of an execution against William Nelson, and received a sheriff’s deed therefor.

Action in equity to quiet title. The petition states the cause of action as follows: “ Tour petitioner, Henry H. Hughes, respectfully represents unto your honor that on or about the 1st day of February, 1862, one Asa Hughes (being then in full life), late of Marion county, Iowa, was seized in fee simple of the following real estate situated in said county, to wit: The west half of the southwest quarter and the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section twelve…

The plaintiff, in Ms petition, states that on the 26th day of February, 1868, the defendants applied to him to sell certain bonds, and represented to plaintiff that they were contractors with the city of Memphis, in the State of Tennessee, for paving certain streets in said city with Nicolson pavement; that they had received, and were further to receive, on such contract, certain bonds of said city of Memphis, issued and to be issued therefor, and exhibited to plaintiff the…

Action upon a promissory note. The answer of defendant avers that the note, in its body and signature, is a forgery; that the payee of the note, one Pond, procured the signature of defendant thereto by fraud, and that plaintiff is not a bona fide holder, and did not pay a valuable consideration for the note.

. On the 28th day of December, 1868, the plaintiff filed in the Wan Burén district court a petition, alleging that plaintiff has been duly appointed receiver of the First National Bank of Keokuk, organized under the currency act of congress, approved Feb. 25,1863, which bank closed its doors February 21, 1868, and refused to pay its circulating notes and other liabilities; that its liabilities were $242,000; that all of its available assets would not pay over fifty per cent…

The plaintiff brought this suit in equity to recover of defendant a special tax levied upon his lots in “ Peasley’s Addition to the city of Burlington,” to pay for macadamizing the street in front of said lots, and to make the tax levied a lien upon the lots. The appellant defended the-action on several grounds, and also claimed damages by way of counterclaim for injuries to his property by reason of the grading of the street.

Action to recover damages on account of injuries sustained by plaintiff from having been run over by a train of cars upon defendant’s road. Tbe original petition avers tbat plaintiff, at tbe time be received tbe injuries, was in tbe employment of defendant, and while in tbe discharge of bis duty in passing along tbe track of defendant’s road was, through negligence of defendant’s servants, run over and injured.

Action to recover damages for the death of Edwin S. Dewey, caused, as plaintiffs allege, by the carelessness and negligence of defendants’ employees. There was a trial to a jury, resulting in a verdict for plaintiffs for $5,000. The defendants appeal.

The plaintiff sued before a justice of the peace as assignee of an instrument as follows: Jarmary 26, 1870. “ Me. 0.

The plaintiff filed, in tlie Clark district court, an amended petition substantially as follows: “Tbe board of supervisors of said Warren county, on tbe 5th day of September, A. JD. 1865, at a regular session of said board, passed a resolution wbicb is of record in said county, as follows: “ Resolved, By tbe board of supervisors of Warren county, Iowa, that there be submitted to tbe voters of said county, at tbe October election, 1865, the question of building a court-house…

The defendant was indicted at the September term, 1869, of the district court for Clayton county, for the murder of Maria Ilagerty, in December, 1868. A change of venue was had to Fayette county, where the defendant was tried at the June term, 1810, and found guilty of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to be hanged on the 9th day of September following. He appealed to this court, and stay'of proceedings was had accordingly.

Action at law by plaintiff as tbe holder, of a promissory note, made by tbe defendant “ to Alfred Ingalls or bearer, for $250, it being given for tbe profits on ten seeders.” Answer in general denial, failure of consideration, etc.; also, denying that be ever signed tbe note sued on as a note; also, by way of cross action, sets up an equitable claim for tbe surrender of tbe note as having been procured by conspiracy and fraud by tbe payee, tbe plaintiff and others.

The original petition claimed $500 for a wrongful conversion by defendant of eight chests of tea and three boxes of spice.

Action in chancery to enforce the specific performance of a contract to convey certain lands. Upon the final hearing a decree was rendered in accordance with the prayer of the petitioner. Defendant appeals.

Action in detinue for torses, harness, cows, hogs, plows, harrows, wagon, reaper, planter, stalk cutter, wheat, corn, etc., being the stock, utensils, and grain on a certain farm, owned by the defendant John Berry, and cultivated by the defendant James Berry. There was a jury trial, resulting in a yerdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendants appeal.

Action upon a promissory note executed September 26, 1857, by a firm of which defendants and one D. S. Lee were partners. The note became due three months after its date. The petition alleges that, on the 17th day of February, 1859, plaintiff and defendants entered into a contract whereby the time of the payment of the note was extended one year from that date. The contract is set out in the petition.

Action for divorce. Tbe district court dismissed tbe plaintiff’s petition, and rendered judgment against ber for costs; sbe appeals.

■ This is a proceeding in equity. The petition alleges that a partnership exists between plaintiff and defendant in the livery business, to continue during the pleasure and will of the parties, each one having contributed equally to the capital of the firm, sharing equally in the profits, and to have, upon the dissolution of the firm, equal portions of the property; that the firm owns a large amount of property which, together with the good will of the business, cannot be…

At tbe December term, 1870, tbe opinion of tbis court was filed in tbis appeal reversing tbe orders of tbe district court appointing a-receiver and granting an injunction.

On the 26th day of August, 1870, an information, in the nature of a quo wa/rrcmto, was filed by Lyman A. Ellis, district attorney of the Seventh judicial district of the State of Iowa, on the relation of Elijah Buell, causing the court to be informed, that Lyons city is, and has been for several years last past, a corporation under the laws of said State.

Action to recover forty acres of land in Scott county (N. W. of N. E., of 20, 78; 3), and damages for wrongful detention. The plaintiff alleges that he is the owner in fee simple and entitled to the possession; that defendant has possession and wrongfully keeps plaintiff out.

This action was brought on a promissory* note for $500, bearing ten per cent interest, made by defendants to Haislett & Co. or order, August 9, 1867, and transferred to the plaintiff before maturity.

Action for divorce upon the alleged ground of cruel and inhuman treatment endangering plaintiff’s life. Trial by the court. Petition dismissed. Plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Action in chancery for relief against a judgment at law alleged to be irregular and void and asking that, by proper decree, a new trial may be had in the action wherein the judgment was rendered. Upon final bearing tbe district court dismissed plaintiff’s petition; tbe judgment was affirmed by tbe general term. Plaintiff appeals to tbis court.

/ Action oh a policy of insurance, issued by defendant on alleged property of Goodale & Hosford, payable, in case of loss, to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiff alleges in his petition that the defendant, being engaged in procuring subscriptions for the payment of money to aid in the construction of the Iowa Central Northern Kailroad, verbally promised the plaintiff that if he would subscribe $200 to the purpose above stated, he, the defendant, would, in case plaintiff should sell the farm on which he was then living before the payment of all of said subscription, take all of plaintiff’s obligations and rights in and…

On the 2d day of July, 1870, the defendant, Gester, confessed judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Eason, for the sum of $674.45, which was entered up by the clerk of the district court in Winnesheik county, and, on the 18th day of July, 1870, execution was issued thereon, upon which John Stewart was garnished.

Tuts is a proceeding to assess damages incurred by reason of tbe location of a county road upon tbe land of plaintiffs. There was a verdict and judgment in the circuit court, in favor of plaintiffs, in the sum of $180 from which they appeal.

The plaintiff filed in the Dubuque county circuit court a petition claiming of Johanna Kreismer, as administratrix of the estate of John Kreismer, deceased, the sum of $1658.25, and interest, alleged to be due from said estate upon account.

The plaint-ift commenced Ms action in equity in tbe district court of Black Hawk county to redeem certain real property from tax sale at wbicb tbe defendants were the alleged purchasers and had obtained a tax deed for the land. The original notice was not served on the defendants but service for them was accepted by Griffith & Knight, their attorneys, on the 7th day of March, 1870. The petition was filed April 16, 1870.

Action of light for the l’eeovery of a strip of land nine feet wide on the south end, and eleven feet wide on the north end, from the west side of lot eleven, in block six, in Inka, Tama county. Answer in denial. The cause was referred to D. D. Applegate to hear and determine the issues, upon the confirmation of whose report defendant had judgment for costs. Plaintiff appeals.’ The necessary facts are stated in the opinion.

An order for -a preliminary injunction was made, and a writ issued and served.

Action brought originally before a justice of the peace, to recover a penalty for the violation of an ordinance of the city of Dubuque. Judgment was rendered for plain tiff, which, upon appeal to the circuit court, was affirmed. Defendants appeal to this court.

The following brief statement presents tbe question involved in tbis case.

Action in ordinary by plaintiff, claiming of defendant tbe sum of $200 for the wrongful seizure and conversion to his own use of two hundred and thirty bushels of corn of the value of seventy-five cents per bushel, of the property of plaintiff.

On the 11th day of July, 1870, the plaintiff filed in the circuit court of Fayette county his petition for a writ of certiorari. On the same day an order for the writ was made returnable on the 13th of July, 1870. The writ was issued and served, whereupon the defendant appeared and filed a motion to dismiss the proceeding, for the following reasons: 1. That notice of the application was not given. 2. That the county, superintendent is not a judicial officer. 3.

Action in chancery to cancel and declare forfeited and void a contract, for tbe conveyance of certain lands. Defendants, by cross bill, ask tbat tbe contract be enforced and tbat plaintiff be required to specifically perform it. Tbe petition of plaintiff was dismissed, and tbe relief prayed for in defendants’ cross bill was granted by tbe decree of tbe district court. Plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff alleges that the E. £, S. ~W. ¿, Section 29, T. 85, Range 5, was inclosed, and that the mules, horses and stock of defendant broke and threw down the fences inclosing said premises, and destroyed a portion of his crops, to his damage in the sum of $200. Answer in denial, and that plaintiff, at the time said damage was done, as claimed in his said petition, had no fences sufficient to turn stock, and such as are required by law.

The petition shows that Peter Keever, Sr., in his life-time made a will, which, after his decease, in 1849, was duly proved, containing the following clause, viz.: “ I give and bequeath to my son, Peter Keever, Jr., the use and occupation of all my landed estate (except the house and lot devised to Abigail Shaw) and in case of his marriage and having children, his said child or children are to have the said lands after the death of my son Peter; and in case of the death of…

A proceeding was instituted in the district court, charg ing defendant with being the father of an illegitimate child, and, on motion of defendant, was dismissed on the ground of want of jurisdiction. The State appeals.

Plaintiee alleges that he formed a partnership with defendant in the publication, at Iowa City, of the Daily and Weekly Tribune, and that defendant has excluded him from a participation in the business' of the partnership. He prays a dissolution of the partnership, the appointment of a receiver, and the issuance of an injunction, restraining a sale or incumbrance of the partnership property. Upon the hearing, a receiver was appointed' and an injunction granted as prayed.

Appeal from Black Bowk District Cov/rt. Action in equity to quiet title, etc. Both parties appeal. The facts are stated iu the opinion.

On the 16th day of June, 1870, the defendant was arrested upon a warrant issued by a justice of the peace, charging him with obstructing a street railway in the city of Dubuque, in violation of a city ordinance. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Upon a trial before the justice, he was found guilty and fined, from which judgment he appealed to the district court, where he was again tried, found guilty and fined, from which he appeals to this court.

Action at law to recover the possession of certain lands. Both plaintiff and defendants claim title under a will of Esther Walling in the following words: “I give and bequeath to my son, Elisha Jennings (describing the lands devised), during his natural life, and after his decease to revert to his heirs, provided, however, that the said Elisha Jennings shall provide a home for his sister, Oriel Zerna, till her marriage, and then to give her an outfit equal to what her…

Agypeal from Muscatine Circuit Court. Action of replevin. The defendant made application for a change of venue, accompanied by the proper affidavit of himself and three disinterested persons, that the influence of the plaintiff was so great over the inhabitants of Muscatine county that defendant could not obtain a fair trial therein. The application was overruled and the cause was tried by a jury, which returned a verdict for plaintiff. The defendant appeals.

A/pgeal from Dubuque Ciramt Court. Action upou a life insurance policy made by the defendant, March 1, 1869, insuring the life of Mary F. Williams, the mother of plaintiff. The petition .alleged the execution of the .policy upon an .agreed consideration, the death of the insured, notice and proof thereof, and the failure of defendants to pay.

The plaintiff filed his petition in the office of the clerk of the circuit court, setting up a claim against the estate of James Rea, deceased, of which defendant was executor, and on whom an original notice was served. The proceeding was first placed on the court calendar of law causes, but afterward, by order of the judge, transferred to the probate calendar.

The petition alleges, in substance, that the defendant is a corporation, organized under the laws of Iowa; that on the 16th day of October, 1868, the defendant, by its president, S. Weaver, made to Tobias Krider, now deceased, its promissory note as follows: “North Lebanon, October IQth, 1858. “ On or before the 1st day of April, 1861, the board of trustees of Western College of the United Brethern in Christ promise to pay Tobias Krider or his order the sum of five thousand…

The defendants, having located its railroad upon the lands of plaintiff, proceeded to have the damages assessed in accordance with the provisions of the statute. From the award of the commissioners, plaintiff took an appeal to the district court. Upon defendants’ motion, the district court dismissed the appeal on the ground of want of jurisdiction to entertain it, holding that the circuit court of the proper county had exclusive jurisdiction of the appeal.

The plaintiffs, Morris B. Brown, for himself and a hundred and thirteen others, tax payers and property-holders of Bellevue township, filed his petition, making James A. Bryan, treasurer of Jaekson county, and B. W. Seward, collector of Bellevue township, defendants.

Action of replevin, originally brought before a justice of the peace, to recover the .possession of a pile of 150 fence posts, one stack of hay, and the corn standing on eight acres of land on the premises where the plaintiff and her husband reside, which had been levied upon under an execution in favor of defendant againt John Mazouck, the' husband. . The plaintiff claims to be the owner of the property replevied.

These cases involve substantially tbe same facts. They are actions at law, and tbe pleadings in each set up tbe same causes of action and defense. Tbe defendant Babcock is tbe superintendent of tbe schools of tbe independent school district of Decorah ; tbe other defendants are tbe board of directors of that district.

<p>1. Tax sale: combination between buyers : evidence. Where» combination is entered into between the purchasers at a tax sale, to the effect that they will not bid against each other, or that they will bid in turn, the sale is void.</p> <p>2.-Evidence that such eourse was pursued at the sale is admissible, in the first instance,-although it is not shown that the defendant, who was a purchaser thereat, was a party to such combination.</p>

Action in equity to cancel and set aside a tax sale and deed, and a decree of court' foreclosing tbe equity of tbe former owner, to declare said decree null and void and to quiet title in plaintiffs. There was a demurrer to tbe petition, wbicb was overruled by tbe court. Tbe defendants stood upon their demurrer, and judgment was rendered as prayed for in tbe petition. Tbe defendants appeal.

This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover damages to 400 barrels of flour, alleged to have been sustained while the same was being transported from Waverly, Iowa, to Chicago, Illinois, on defendant’s railroad. The cause was tried to a jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

The appellant, Lucien D. Lewis, with others, was, on the 5th of June, 1868, brought before S. L. Doggett, a justice of the peace of Delaware county, on a charge of assault with intent to inflict a great bodily injury. They procured a continuance, and each entered into a recognizance of $100 to appear for examination on the 25th day of June.

<p>Appeal from Marshall District Court —</p>

, on the 37th day of October, 1860, recovered, in the United States district court, a judgment against Cheney & Brackett; and that the real estate described in the petition was sold on the 15th day of March, 1862, as the property of said Cheney & Brackett, at marshal’s sale, on execution issued on said judgment, at which sale John Blunt became the purchaser; that said land not being redeemed he received a deed therefor from the marshal, on the 1st day of February, 1864,…

The plaintiffs filed their petition claiming of the defendants $3,000 damages for a willful trespass in entering upon certain lauds of plaintiffs (describing them), and removing therefrom, and converting to their own use, a large amount of valuable timber.

Plaintive sues, as assignee by delivery, for a valuable consideration, before due, of a note, as follows, to wit: “ On or before the first day of April, 1869, for value received, I, the subscriber, of Harrison T’p., county of Lee, State of Iowa, promise to pay Alfred Ingalls, or bearer, two hundred and fifty dollars, it being for the .profits on ten seeders, with interest at ten per cent.

<p>Appeal from Clinton District Court —</p>

<p>Appeal from Decatwr Circuit Court —</p>

<p>Appeal from Black Hawh Circuit Court —</p> <p>SALE OE PERSONAL PROPERTY — DELIVERY.</p> <p>Action of replevin for a reaper and mower. Verdict and judgment for defendant; plaintiff appeals.</p>

The answer of defendants, besides denying generally the allegations of the petition, sets up a former adjudication in an action between the parties in the district court of Winneshiek county, where the question of the non-fulfillment and abandonment of the contract sued on in this case was inissue, and a judgment thereon favorable to defendant was rendered.

, specifying the facts. On a trial had the defendant was found guilty and adjudged to pay a fine of twenty dollars. He appealed to the circuit court, where another trial was had with a like result. He now appeals to this court.