Volume 40 — Iowa Reports

ON tbe 18th of March, 1872, the plaintiff,and T. Oleson, her husband, filed a petition in equity, alleging that in 1857 John Oleson died intestate, the owner of the N. E. J of section No. 32, township'97, range 8, the N. E. \ whereof was his homestead, and leaving surviving him plaintiff, his widow, and four minor children.

These are actions for a writ of mandamus to compel the Board of Supervisors to issue, in each case, an order to the treasurer of the county, directing the payment to plaintiffs respectively of sums of money paid by them for taxes, which they allege were paid by mistake. On final hearing the writ was denied. The plaintiffs appeal.

The plaintiffs, D. J. Sheldon and C. J. Quinn, in their petition aver in substance that on June 19, 1869, they borrowed of defendants, who are bankers, $811 for sixty days, and as collateral security for re-payment they left with defendants two notes made by Bailey & Go. to plaintiffs, aggregating $1,450, with the verbal agreement, that if plaintiffs failed to pay the loan at maturity the defendants should continue to hold the collaterals, notify the makers of them and…

■ ON the 31st of January, 1873, plaintiff filed bis petition in substance alleging that November 26, 1870, one E. Parle sold and conveyed a certain ten acres of land to S. O. Breese, plaintiff’s intestate.

At the.December term, 1873, of the Circuit Court of Tama county, a cause was tried between the above named parties, and judgment was rendered for the defendant. At the April term, 1874, of said court, the plaintiff filed a petition for a new trial, upon the ground that he had discovered material evidence since tbe last trial wbicli could not, with reasonable diligence, have been discovered before.

Aotion in equity to sustain the enforcement of an execution against plaintiff, upon a bond executed by plaintiff to stay a judgment recovered by the said bank against one John D. Mulick. Decree for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

The plaintiff commenced his action before a justice of the peace, claiming of defendant the sum of fifteen dollars on account for professional services rendered for, and at the request of, defendant. The defendant denied the claim. The cause was tried by the justice, and judgment was rendered for plaintiff for fourteen dollars and costs.

Apjp&al from Marshall District Goxort. AotioN of replevin for a sewing machine, of which plaintiff claims to be the owner.

AotioN to recover for the support and education of a son of defendant, from the year 1853 to 1871, and for money advanced for bis use. The petition alleges that the child was taken, at the request of defendant in infancy, and cared for and educated by plaintiff.- An account is attached to the petition, charging each year’s support as a separate item.

Action to enforce a mechanic’s lien upon a slaughterhouse, pens and fences, and Hanneman’s leasehold interest in the real, estate whereon they were situated. The defendants, Allen Davison and W. H. Stivers, claim an interest in the property by virtue of a chattel mortgage made by Hanneman to Davison, dated November 16, 1871, and a sale thereunder to Stivers as .trustee for Davison, made January 10, .1872.

This is a suit in equity to enjoin the defendant from preventing tbe plaintiff from using a private passway or easement over certain land now belonging to tbe defendant. Tbe sole issue is as to tbe plaintiff’s right to tbe use of sucb way or easement. A temporary injunction was allowed, and upon final bearing it was made perpetual. . Tbe defendant appeals.

The plaintiff, by his petition, averred that May 8, 1872, he purchased of defendant a mileage ticket entitling him to ride one thousand miles on the defendant’s road. A copy of the ticket is set out, and shows by its terms that it was issued to plaintiff, that it expired February 1, 1873, that it was not transferrable, and if presented by another or after its expiration, the' conductor will take up the ticket and collect fare.

<p>1. Negligence: what is competent to prove: railroads. In an. action against a railroad company for injury to stock, evidence that the train was running at a high rate of speed, and that the bell was not rung or whistle blown, is admissible to establish the fact of negligence.</p> <p>2. -: instruction: railroads. The court instructed the juiy to the effect that if defendant’s employes saw the cow so near the track as to justify the reasonable inference that she was in danger, and they could, by the exercise of ordinary care, have avoided the injury and did not do so, they were negligent; and if, after discovering the cow, they were unable, by the exercise of ordinary care to avoid injury to her, they were not negligent: Held, that the instruction was not erroneous.</p> <p>3. -: JURY MUST DETERMINE WHAT CONSTITUTES. Itis for the jury to determine, under the established facts of a case, whether the conduct of defendant’s employes was ordinarily prudent and careful.</p>

This is an action by ordinary proceedings, upon seven judgments, obtained by the plaintiff against the defendant before a justice of the peace upon warrants issued pursuant to a vote of the people in aid of a railroad, for one hundred dollars each, beside costs. The defendant by answer set up several technical defenses; a demurrer was sustained to all but one.

The petition, amongst other tilings, alleged in substance that on the 10th day of June, 1871, the defendants and others, numbering in all about forty persons, executed to G. H. Warren, then cashier of the Tama County Bank, a promissory note for the sum of $2,500.00, payable January 1st, 1872, with interest at ten per cent.

. This is a suit in equity, commenced November 9, 1872, to enjoin, set aside and declare satisfied a certain judgment of foreclosure rendered by the Circuit Court of Marshall County, May 2, 1871, in a cause wherein H. E. J. Boardman was plaintiff, and H. M. Weeks, Clara J. Weeks, John B. York and J. 0. Wallace, were defendants.

This action is brought to cancel and set aside a certain tax sale and deed, of the northeast quarter of' section twenty-five in township No. 76, north, of range No. 25, west, in Warren qounty, Iowa. The cause was tried in the court below, by the first method in equity and a decree rendered dismissing plaintiff’s petition, from which he appeals. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion.

AotioN in chancery brought in December, 1868, to enjoin the sale of lands of plaintiff, situate in Hamilton county, for taxes levied from the years. 1859 to I860, inclusive, and to enforce an equitable rebatement of interest and penalties upon such taxes as were levied after the lands became subject to taxation, as claimed by plaintiff. Like relief is claimed for other parties having common interest in the questions involved in the case.

AotioN on a note for $200 due August 11, 1873, with ten per cent, for one year, and to foreclose a mortgage given to secure it.

On the 4th of July, 1873, the plaintiff filed a petition in the Plymouth District Court, claiming judgment against defendant for $2541.66 upon county warrants. On tbe 21st of July, being the first day of the term, plaintiff filed an amended petition claiming judgment for a further sum of $4200, also on warrants against the county.

Aotion on a promissory note. Yerdict and judgment for' defendants. Plaintiff appeals. The facts of the case aj>pear in the opinion.

The facts of this case are as follows: The trial in the action was commenced on the 8th day of February, 1873, and concluded on the 17th of the same month, when the cause was submitted to the jury. The 17th was the last day of the term, and on the next day the judge opened court in Davis, another county in his district. Prior to the judge leaving for the Davis county court, the jury had not agreed, and no formal adjournment of the Wapello term was announced.

Suit in equity to enjoin the sale of lot eleven, block twenty, in the town of Dunlap, Harrison county, under certain judgments upon mechanic’s lien claims. A demurrer to the petition was sustained. The plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiee commenced an action .before a justice of tbe peace, alleging in his petition that, during the year 1871, he was a practicing physician, and as such was called by Dr. fin. McK. Findley, another practicing physician who was at the time treating defendant and his family, who were sick, to assist him in treating defendant and family, as a consulting physician. That plaintiff rendered services which were reasonably worth the sum of $42.50.

Mary ANN Blaok, one of the plaintiffs, is the widow of Dominick Black, deceased, and Wetherell, the other plaintiff, is a creditor of his estate; the defendant is the administrator.

AotioN upon a note for $250 made by the defendants to W. E. Galpin or order, dated October 14, 1872, and payable in ninety days. The defendant, Kelso, was only surety for Wilson. There was judgment by default against Wilson, the principal.

AotioN upon promissory notes executed in Tennessee in 1859. The defendant ,in his answer alleges that, in 1861, he became a resident of the state of Connecticut where he has ever since resided, and that, by the laws of that state, which are properly pleaded, action upon the notes was barred before the commencement of this suit.

ON the 18th day of March, 1871, Isaac Brandt, a citizen and resident of Polk county, filed before Gr. B. Hammer, a justice of the peace, an information charging that ¥m. J. Harris had in store in a building described, certain intoxicating liquors with intent to sell the same in said county, contrary to the provisions of the act for the suppression of intemperance.

AotioN in chancery to quiet plaintiff’s title to certain lands in Montgomery county. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for in the petition. Defendants appeal. The facts of the case sufficiently appear in the opinion.

ActioN to recover the possession of certain land described in the petition. The defendants set up title to the premises. There was a trial to the court without a jury, and judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. The facts material to an understanding of the point ruled in the opinion are found therein.

AcnoN to recover certain school taxes which are alleged illegal, and to have been erroneously paid. A demurrer to the petition was sustained. The plaintiff appeals.

' Ajypeal.from Blaclchawh District Court. AotioN of replevin to recover the possession of certain personal property under a claim' of ownership) by plaintiffs. Defendant, being a sheriff, bad seized the property on a.n attachment against Nicholson & McOrea, and alleges in bis’ answer that it was their property and subject to seizure theron. There was a verdict and judgment for defendant; plaintiff appeals. Other facts in the case are stated in the opinion.

ActioN to recover damages for the obstruction of a private way used under a claim of right thereto by plaintiff. The defendant filed an equitable answer alleging a mistake in the deed to plaintiff’s grantor, reserving in the party executing it the right to erect a fence and gate across the way. Defendant is the owner of the land over which the road runs, deriving his title from the same party who originally granted the right of way.

Israel Crafts, as administrator of the estate of John Hufty, deceased, brought a suit at law, without attachment or other auxiliary proceeding, in the Henry County Circuit Court, against one Levi Clark, and at the May Term, 1870, he recovered judgment against Clark, for the sum of $973.40 and costs.

ActioN of replevin. Plaintiff alleges that he is the absolute owner of a certain John.II. Manny reaper and mower, of the value of one hundred dollars. That on the 8th day of July, 1871, he bargained the same to one J. IT.

Action upon an account for goods sold. The cause was submitted to the court without a jury, and a judgment rendered against defendant for $346.83. Plaintiffs appeal. The facts are fully stated in the opinion.

♦ AotioN at law. The petition alleges that plaintiff was the guardian of defendants, but has been discharged; that as such guardian he paid out and advanced a sum of money for the use and benefit of defendants over and above the amount received by him; that he filed his claim in the court of probate, and an order was therein made for the payment of the sum claimed by the guardian of defendants, which has not been obeyed; and that one of defendants has reached his majority,…

ÜN the 26th day of March, 1873, plaintiff filed his petition in replevin alleging that he is. the owner, and entitled to the possession of- certain personal property, that the defendants wrongfully detain the same from him, and claim to hold it by virtue of a writ of attachment issued from the office of-the Clerk of the District Court, in a case between John IT. Bacon and S. H. Marshall. In the case of J. II. Bacon v. 8.

<p>1. Partnership: set-oye: yokeclosuke. In an action to foreclose a mortgage the defendant may plead, as a set-off, an account against a firm of which the foreclosure plaintiff is a member. Cole, J., dissenting.</p> <p>2. -: -: statute oy limitations. In such a case the statute of limitations does not operate to bar the set-off. (Revision, Sec. 2752.)</p> <p>3. Set-off: what constitutes. A cause of action founded upon a contract may be plead.ed as a set-off when, although it exists in fayor of several parties, it may be pleaded by one alone, or, when it exists against several, it may be pleaded against one.</p>

This action is brought upon the official bond of Isaac Ilardinbrook, as treasurer of the District Township of Bluff Creek, in Monroe county, dated March 24,1870.

<p> Appeal from Jackson District Court. </p> <p>The defendant was indicted and convicted for obsti’ucting a highway, and now appeals to this court. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion.</p>

The same facts are involved in all of these causes, and they are submitted upon one abstract.

ActioN to foreclose a mortgage given to secure a note executed by defendant, O. K. Tanner, to Frances B. Tanner. Another mortgage, upon the same property, was afterward executed to defendant, Melliop, who claims, because of an agreement entered into by Frances B. Tanner to cancel the first mortgage, bis security is the prior lien. The cause was referred, and upon the import of the referee a decree was entered declaring Melhop’s mortgage the paramount lien. Plaintiff appeals.

ActioN in chancery to enjoin the collection of a tax levied upon the property of defendant, to aid in the construction of the Missouri, Iowa & Nebraska Railroad. A demurrer to certain parts of the petition was sustained. To the other facts defendant answered, and upon the trial a preliminary injunction allowed upon filing the petition was dissolved, and the' petition was dismissed. The plaintiff appeals.

ActioN to foreclose three mortgages, securing as many promissory notes, two of them executed to one Danforth, and the other to plaintiff. The notes payable to Danforth, with the mortgages securing them, were duly transferred to plaintiff. As a defense to the action, usury is pleaded. A trial to the court without' a jury resulted in a judgment sustaining the defense pleaded. Plaintiff appeals.

AotioN of replevin for a quantity of shingles, lath and lumber, of tlie aggregate value of $2,012.33. The defendant’s answer denies tbe wrongful taking and detention of the property in question, and alleges that it belonged to and was in the possession of N. E. Reed, and was attached by defendant as the property of Reed in an action wherein Edger & Co. were plaintiffs and said Reed was defendant. There was a jury trial, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiffs.

The defendants were indicted for corrupt and willful misconduct in their official capacity as school directors. A demurrer to the indictment was sustained. The State appeal^.

<p> Appeal from Wapello District Gourt. </p>

Tub petition of plaintiffs represents that they are tbe heirs at law of one John Gebhard, who died seized of lot 943 D in the city of Burlington. That after the decease of their ancestor, the real estate mentioned was sold by defendant Spiegel upon a deed of trust, executed by John Gebhard, to secure a promissory note made by him to defendant Sattler for the sum of $1000. The note and deed of trust bore date February 22, 1859.

ActioN in chancery to set aside certain deeds for a lot in Sioux City, and to declare the title vested in plaintiff. The defendant, Forbes, by answer and cross-bill claimed the title to be in. himself. Upon a final hearing the court refused the relief asked by plaintiff, and by the decree rendered, declared the title vested in Forbes, and ordered that plaintiff be forever barred setting up claim thereto. Plaintiff appeals.

sub-contractor to foreclose a mechanic's Hen against Reichard and Woodruff & Son, contractors, and the Trustees of Iowa College as the owners of the structure erected. The plaintiff claims a balance of $21S7.18 clue upon an account for stone delivered for the building under a written agreement with the contractors. There was a verdict and judgment for $312 in favor of plaintiff, from which it appeals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

Plaintiff claimed twelve hundred dollars damages on account of an alleged breach of the following written contract, executed by plaintiff and defendant, to-wit: “Whereas, John E. Pyne has this day sold to James A. Nowlin the following described real estate,, situated in Ilardin county, Iowa, to-wit: * * * '* for the sum of twelve hundred dollars, for which the said Pyne agrees to deliver to the said Nowlin a warranty deed, on or before the first day of April, 1874, in…

The defendant was indieted, tried and convicted for the crime of murder, and sentenced to eighteen years in the penitentiary. He appeals.

ActioN upon a recognizance executed by defendants for the appearance of one B. F. Ross before the District Court of Ringgold county, Iowa, on the 26th day of March, 1873, to answer to a charge of burglary.

This suit was brought to enjoin the defendant from maintaining, and for the removal of, his mill-dam, on the ground that it backs the water upon the mill wheel of the plaintiff, situated several miles above on the same stream, and to recover damages for injuries caused by such backwater. By consent the cause was tried by a referee, who reported in favor of defendant, upon which judgment was rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals. •

PlaiNtiff in the first count of her petition alleges in substance that on the 1st day of May, 1871, her husband, C. C. Koehler, loaned of her money to the firm of Wilson, Funk & Smith, the sum of four hundred dollars, and took a note therefor in his own name, due in six months, with interest at ten per cent., all of which is due and unpaid except the interest for one year.

This action was brought by Floyd county to foreclose a mortgage taken by the school fund commissioner of the county to secure the payment of money of the school fund loaned to defendant. Besides a decree of foreclosure, judgment was sought against certain parties executing a promissory note for the money loaned. A decree of foreclosure and judgment upon the note was rendered in the District Court, from which defendants appeal.

The petition is in two counts. Tbe first claims to recover $1,900 upon a written contract for tbe building of a bridge at New Hartford, over Beaver creek, tbe second is for extra work and materials, performed and furnished, in building another bridge at Shell Bock, over the Shell Kock river.

This is an action for specific performance of a contract, entered into between the parties, whereby the defendants for the consideration therein named agreed to convey to the plaintiff the undivided one-third of lots seven and eight, in block twenty nine, in the town of “ Red Oak Junction.” The defendants, in their answer, admitted the making of the contract, but denied that the consideration named therein had been paid.

This is a suit in equity to set aside a tax deed made by t*he treasurer of Hardin county, upon a tax sale of the land of the plaintiff. The cause was tried by. the court, and a decree rendered dismissing plaintiff’s petition, from which he appeals. The further facts appear in the opinion.

This is an appeal from the ruling of the Circuit Court upon a motion to re-tax costs.

This is an action to recover for injuries to the plaintiff’s horse, caused by the alleged negligent running of the defendant’s train against the horse, in the village of Corning. The answer is a denial, etc. The cause was tried to a jury, who found a vérdict for plaintiff for $85. The defendant appeals.

Getiorari to Lee District Gourt. On the petition of tbe defendant this canse is brought to this court on certiorari. The defendant complains and alleges that he was illegally convicted and fined for an alleged contempt of the District Court. The material facts appear in the opinion.

ActioN to foreclose a mortgage executed by the defendants, Brown and others. Weiser is made a defendant, as one claiming some interest in the mortgaged premises, which is claimed to be subject to the mortgage. There was a decree foreclosing the mortgage subject to certain judgments held by defendant, Weiser, which are declared to be prior to the lien of plaintiff’s mortgage. Defendant, Weiser, appeals.

This proceeding was commenced November 11, 1873, to obtain a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The two causes in which the new trial is sought were actions upon two notes made by the defendant to Thomas Marlow or bearer, and in each of which the defense was a denial of the execution of the notes.

ON the 7 th of February, 1872, tbe defendant, Ten Eyck, brought an action in the District Court of Hamilton county, to recover of the plaintiff, Lunqnest the possession of the northwest quarter of section thirty-three, in township eighty-six north, of range twenty-six west. On the 9th of April, 1872, j ndgment was rendered in favor of Ten Eyck, that he was the owner and entitled to the immediate possession of said land.

ActioN to recover for personal injuries, sustained by plaintiff, by reason of bis horse, which he was driving to a sleigh, jumping from a bridge built by the county across the Upper Iowa river, and thus throwing plaintiff from the bridge at a great height. The accident, it is charged, resulted from the fault of the county in failing to keep the bridge in such a safe condition as would have prevented its occurrence. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff.

' AotioN upon a judgment rendered in tbe Circuit Court of Decatur county, Indiana. There was a verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff apjieals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

ON the 10th day of June, 1873, the plaintiffs, voters and tax payers of Louisa county, filed their petition alleging in substance that, on the 8th of May, 1873, notice was published that at the June term of the Board of Supervisors a petition would be presented, asking that' the question of the relocation of the county seat of said county be submitted to the people at the next general election.

Thís is an action for divorce. The parties were married in Illinois, about August 1st, 18T0, and lived together as husband and wife till April 3d, 1872. On the third day of April, 1872, they entered into a written agreement to live separate during the course of their natural lives, and each agreed not to hold the other responsible for any obligation growing out of the marriage relations, and to release all claims to the property of the other. .

$20,000, alleging as grounds thereof, that defendants owned and were running a large amount of machinery, shafting, etc., in said penitentiary, which was negligently, carelessty, and dangerously constructed, coupled and managed; and that plain-tiff, while at work about said machinery under the orders and directions of defendants, on account of the dangerous construction and management of the shafting, was caught and severely injured.

Each of these actions is upon a bond executed by P. P. Henderson, as treasurer of Warren county, as principal, with the other defendants, respectively, as sureties. One of the bonds bears date January 1st, 1866, and the other December 18th, 1867.

Appeal fro7n Fremont Circuit Court. The plaintiff claims of Richard White and Anna M. White, administrators of the estate of D. II. White, deceased, the sum of three hundred dollars, with ten per cent interest from the 28th day of September, 1870, upon a ¡iromissory note dated September 28th, 1870, due fifteen months after date, executed by T. S. Higginbotham and D. II. White, security, and payable to O. S. McMaken, or bearer. The defendants answered, admitting that D. II.

This is an action to recover of the defendant, as administrator of the estate of O. E. Leffingwell, deceased, the sum of $1520, alleged to have been contained in a package of money deposited by the plaintiff with said decedent for safe keeping in November, 1869. Answer in denial. The cause was tried to a jury in January, 1874, who found for plaintiff $970, with six per cent from March 25, 1873. The defendant appeals.

JohN Scully died intestate prior to September, 1870, and Catharine Scully was appointed administratrix of his estate.

This controversy arises in the proceedings lor the settlement of the estate of William Easton an'd Elizabeth Easton, deceased. The appellant herein claims to be entitled to the one-third proceeds of the sale of certain real estate formerly belonging to said decedents, and he makes this claim under a mortgage made by the appellee, O. W. Easton, to E. R. Stewart, and at the foreclosure of which the appellant purchased.

<p>1. Parties: defect of: demurrer. A defect of parties, apparent on the face of the petition, can only be assailed by demurrer.</p> <p>2. Pleading: cohstructioh. A pleading is presumed to refer to existing conditions. An allegation that a party was entitled to dower, without specifying the time when the right attached, was held to mean that she was entitled to the dower estate recognized by law at the time the pleading was filed.</p> <p>3. Practice: pueadotg: parties. An answer alleging a defect of parties plaintiff is in the nature of a plea in abatement, and tenders an issue to he tried; it does not authorize a dismissal upon a refusal to make new parties.</p>

The plaintiff brought this action to recover the east half of the south-east quarter of section thirty-two, in township sixty-nine, north of range thirty-live west. There was a jury trial resulting in a verdict for plaintiff.

This action was commenced February 3d, 1872, to recover damages for a breach of a certain contract between the defendant, The Dubuque & Sioux City Railroad Company and the Dubuque Elevator Company, corporations organized under the laws of this State. The plaintiffs have become the owners of the property of the Dubuque Elevator Company, and the assignees of its rights and interest in the -contract.

This is an action upon a contract which is in the following-words: “Memoranda of an agreement made and entered into between David Stapleton and Josiah M. Thompson, from Butler county, Pennsylvania, parties of the first part, and John Porter and Pearson A. King, of Johnson county, Iowa, parties of the second part, witnesseth: That the said parties of the first part have this day delivered unto the said parties of the second part three hundred and fifty-four head of good…

ActioN in chancery. The petition alleges that, through false and fraudulent representations of defendant, plaintiffs were induced to purchase from him an interest in a certain patent, issued to him for an improvement or invention for supplying air to the furnaces of boilers, used in generating steam for propelling machinery.

These cases involve the same question and are submitted together. The plaintiff alleges that he is the owner of certain lands in Humboldt county, which the treasurer of said county sold in .1862, some of them for the delinquent taxes of 1860, and some of them for those of 1859 and 1860.

AotioN to recover for killing, by locomotive and train, three colts, one span of mares, and one mule, worth $475.

Tub plaintiff sues to recover damages which he alleges he sustained by falling from a bridge, on a public highway in Davis county, Iowa. The cause was tried to the court, without a jury, resulting in a judgment for the defendant for costs. The plaintiff appeals. See the opinion for the further facts of the case.

The defendants were indicted on three separate indictments for tbe crime of larceny. The indictments were filed February 7,1874; Lindley was arrested July 17,1874, and remained in custody until the 21st day of July, 1874, the first day of the term of the District Court, when he appeared by himself and counsel, waived arraignment and pleaded not guilty, and demanded an immediate trial.

This is a proceeding by certiorari from the Circuit Court to the Board of Supervisors of Harrison comity, in which it is claimed by the plaintiff that the board acted illegally in refusing to entertain a petition by citizens and voters of the county asking that the question of re-locating the county seat be submitted do a vote of the electors of the county.

The defendant was convicted upon an indictment for obtaining money under false pretenses, and sentenced to six months imprisonment in the county jail, and to pay a fine of one dollar, with costs. A former trial had resulted in a verdict of guilty, which was set aside and a new trial granted. From the judgment upon the second conviction he now appeals to this court.

ActioN in chancery. There was a decree in the District Court granting relief to plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

This is an action of replevin for a promissory note for $250.00, executed October 4th, 1872, by Joseph and Christian Shettler, payable one year after date to the order of Ezra Hamilton. The petition alleges that plaintiff is the owner of the note, and that the alleged cause of detention is that the Iowa City National Bank received it for collection on account of John Wilde.

This is a suit in equity to enforce the specific performance of an alleged contract of sale, by parol, of the plaintiff’s equal and undivided interest as a partner with defendant in certain real estate, being six lots in the town of Jessup, with a valuable stone elevator and other buildings thereon; and also the sale of his interest in the partnership business of buying and selling wheat, coal, lumber, implements, etc. The-defendant denies the alleged contract and claims set…

This action was brought December 24, 1873, upon the covenants of a lease for three years, of a farm, made March 3, 1870.

This action is brought by the plaintiff to recover the sum of $14.25, from the county, for guarding and waiting upon certain prisoners in the county jail while the plaintiff was keeper thereof as sheriff of the county. The cause was tried to the court, who rendered judgment for the plaintiff for the sum claimed. Upon the proper certificate of the district judge, the defendant appeals. The further facts of the case appear in the opinion.

ActioN to recover the value ($212.50) of a soda apparatus, etc., sold by plaintiff to defendants, pursuant to an order therefor by them. The petition avers the making of the order by defendants, the compliance therewith by plaintiff, and the failure of the defendants to pay.

Plaintiff alleges in bis petition tbat, in June or July, 1869, be was the owner of the northwest one-third of lot No. 1, in Mill Square, in the city of Waterloo, Iowa, that prior to that time he had erected upon said premises a three-story brick building which he used as a store, office, hall, etc.; that in the erection of said building he placed therfeunder a cellar with substantial and suitable stone walls, which formed the foundation thereof; that in the months of June…

Appeal Jrom BlaeT&hawk Circuit Court. This is an action by a lessee against bis lessor npon tbe covenants of tbe lease, to recover damages for alleged breaches thereof. The lease was made January 18, 1870, of a hotel building not then completed. The defendant, the lessor, covenanted to complete the building for occupancy as a hotel, on the first day of April following, and in case of injury to the premises by fire or the elements, to repair the same.

ActioN upon two promissory notes made by defendant, Oct. 1, 1871, and payable to plaintiff. A demurrer to the petition, on tbe ground that it shows the notes were executed on Sunday, was overruled. Defendant refusing’ to farther plead, a judgment was rendered against bim, from which he appeals.

This action involves the title to thirty-nine lots in Arnold and Young’s addition to the city of Clinton.

AotioN upon, two promissory notes; trial to the court without a jury, and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant, Fisher, appeals.

This action is to recover the possession of the E. SE. J, Sec. 9, T. 78 N., E. 1 E., in Muscatine county. The answer of defendants denies the right and title of plaintiff, and as an equitable defense sets up that the land in controversy was a part of the swamp land grant to the State of Iowa, and the defendants hold title under Muscatine county, to which the land was granted by the State.

This is an action to recover for a horse alleged to have been killed by the cars on the railroad of defendant. There was a jury trial, verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The further facts appear in the opinion. '

The defendant was indicted for keeping a bouse of ill-fame resorted to for the purposes of prostitution and lewdness. Upon a trial to a j ury he was found guilty, and thereon was adjudged to pay a fine of five hundred dollars and costs. The defendant apjjeals.

The plaintiff, as administrator of tbe estate of W. H. Palmer, alleges that said Palmer, on the 26th day of June, 1871, whilst in the employment of defendant, and without any negligence on his part, was, by the negligence of defendant, caught between a car and the engine, and so injured that he died within a few hours, on account of which plaintiff claims $20,000.

ON the second day of June, 1873, James H. Gilruth filed in the Scott Circuit Court an instrument in writing purporting to be the will of James Gilruth, deceased. At the hearing for the probate of said will in the Circuit Court, Thomas W. Gilruth resisted the allowance of the same on grounds following: 1. That the testator was mentally incapacitated to mate the will. 2.

This is a suit in equity for a specific performance of a contract respecting the swamp lands of Cerro Gordo county. After the plaintiff’s rights attached, the county donated.the lands to the McGregor & Sioux City Railroad Co., and by said company they were conveyed to the defendant, Horace S. Taylor, both having notice of the plaintiff’s rights. The District Court adjudged the contract under which the plaintiff claims, to be valid, and decreed a specific performance of it.

The plaintiffs claim $3,500, an alleged balance due for labor performed and materials furnished toward the erection of a tower in front of the Catholic Cathedral, in Dubuque, under a written contract.

This is an action by the plaintiff as administrator of Charlotte Warnecke, deceased, upon a life insurance policy issued by the defendant, upon the life of Win. Warnecke, deceased, for the use and benefit of said Charlotte, in the sum of fifteen hundred dollars. ■ Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The further facts appear in the opinion.

The prisoner was convicted of murder in the second degree, upon an indictment charging her and William Riley with the murder of an infant in Blackhawk county, on the fourth day of April, 1873. The venue of the cause was changed to Bre-mer county. Biley was also convicted upon a separate trial, and the judgment thereon was affirmed in this court at the March Term, 1876. The defendant has 'brought her case by appeal for reyiew in this court.

This action was originally brought before a justice of the peace to recover $70.66, which the plaintiff alleged he had paid for the use of the defendants, J. A. Bowman, Henry Lezotte and Michael Keefe, partners, under the firm napie of Bowman, Lezotte & Keefe.

This suit is brought upon a written contract to recover tbe wages of tbe plaintiff, for teaching a three months winter school, in sub-district No. 7, of the district township of Fred-ericksburg, in Chickasaw county, Iowa.

The defendant was indicted for obstructing a highway known as the Dubuque State Road. ITe was tried, convicted, fined ten dollars and ordered to remove the obstruction. He appeals.

The defendants were indicted, tried and convicted for the crime of nuisance, in keeping a house of ill-fame for the purpose of prostitution and lewdness. From the judgment rendered against them they appeal to this court.

This action is bought by the plaintiff, as administratrix of the estate of K. M. Lawrence, deceased, against the defendants, who are practicing physicians, to recover damages for the death of the said intestate, E. M. Lawrence, alleged to have been caused by the wrongful act or mal-practice by the defendants. The defendants controverted the allegations and claim of the plaintiff. Upon a trial of the issues to a jury, there was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, for $1,750.

The defendant was indicted for the crime of embezzlement of public money while holding the office of treasurer of Jack, son county, in 1873. The venue was changed to Clinton county, and there, upon a plea of not guilty, the cause was tried to a jury, who found the defendant guilty as charged, and found the amount embezzled to be $41,604.65. The court then sentenced the defendant to the penitentiary for three years, and to pay a fine equal to the amount embezzled.

ActioN in chancery to set aside the title of defendants to certain lots in Sioux City, based upon a sale and conveyance under a trust deed executed by Marshall F. Moore, the ancestor of plaintiffs, who are minors. A defendant, who claims part of the property conveyed by the deed of trust,,under a deed by the grantor thereof, unites in the averments of the petition and in its claim for relief.

ActioN to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in being thrown from a sleigh, caused, as he alleges, by obstructions placed in the streets of the town of Algona by the other defendants, which-were negligently suffered by the officers of the town. There was a trial to a jury which resulted in a verdict for plaintiff of $11,000. Upon a motion for a new trial, the plaintiff was by the court required to remit $6,500 of the verdict, otherwise it would be set aside.

This action is brought to recover damages for injuries to himself and for moneys expended in curing his wife of injuries sustained by her in consequence of being thrown from a county bridge over the Cedar river, by reason of the negligent construction of the. same, and by being carelessly allowed to get and remain out of repair. There was a jury trial, resulting in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff. The county appeals.

ActioN in chancery. The petition was filed February 22d, 1871, in the District Court of Monroe county, and charges that two of the defendants hold certain deeds and a mortgage, executed by plaintiff upon certain lands owned by her, the mortgage covering her homestead; that the conveyances were executed to certain of the defendants, as trustees for the benefit of persons. claiming to hold her husband liable on account of moneys deposited by them in a bank which had failed,…

<p> Appeal from Fremont District Court. </p>

Action upon an agreement iu writing to sign a note; answer in denial. Trial to the court and judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed. The defendant appeals.

The plaintiff commenced bis action in equity, alleging that be was the absolute owner of certain described real estate; that on the 15th day of February, 1871, be conveyed one undivided half thereof to D. F. McCarthy, by warranty deed; that possession of the premises was surrendered to and taken by said McCarthy, in pursuance of said conveyance; that plaintiff is bound by the covenants in his deed to warrant and defend the title and possession of the said premises to his…

Action upon an account for goods sold by p-laintiff, to B. F. Dratt & Oo., a firm composed, as alleged, of the defendants B. F. Dratt and John E. Myers. The defendant Myers, only, was served with notice. He answered denying the averments of the plaintiff’s petition, and especially denied that he was ever a partner of B. F. Dratt. Upon a trial to a jury there was a verdict for defendant. A judgment being entered thereon, the plaintiff appeals.

From; November, 1870, until November, 1872, plaintiff was in tbe employ of the McGregor News Printing Company, as editor of tlie McGregor Weekly News. During this time, and for about four years prior thereto, four copies of each issue of this paper were folded up and laid away in a drawer in tbe printing office. •Plaintiff claims that one copy of tbe paper for the whole period was his property.

ON April 30, 1874, an information was filed before a justice of the peace accusing the defendant of the crime of assault and battery upon the person of Honora Sullivan, with a blacksnake whip, and striking her therewith, and trying to ride his horse upon her. A trial was had before the justice, and the defendant was fined fifty dollars, and costs, taxed at $67.10.

' This is an action upon an account containing one hundred and three items, amounting to $3905.24, with two items o’f credit, amounting to $550, for steam engine, boiler, printing pi’ess, type, fixtures and materials for publishing a newspaper.

This is an action in equity to subject tbe equitable interest of tbe defendant, S. 0. Wilson, in certain real estate, the legal title of which is in tbe defendant, Benjamin Austin, to tbe lien of a judgment recovered by plaintiffs against said Wilson. Tbe petition alleges that on tbe 20th of February, 1873, the defendants, tbe Ellisons, recovered judgments against tbe sai'd S.0.

This is a suit in equity to quiet the title in plaintiff to the SW. i of Sec. 29, Tp. 100, E. 12, west. The plaintiff is the grantee and owner of the patent title. The defendant, M. E. Doolittle, bought the land at tax sale, in October, 1865, and took the- treasurer’s certificate of purchase; in September, 1868, he sold and assigned the certificate to the defendant, Lydia J..

This was an action to foreclose a mortgage, in which, in addition to the mortgagors, one Edgar Loomis was made a party defendant. Loomis filed an answer and also a counter claim. He also filed an application for a continuance, which was overruled by the court, to which the defendant excepted. .Thereupon the court rendered judgment of foreclosure in favor of the plaintiff as prayed in the petition. The defendant, Loomis, appeals. . ,

Plaintiff brought his action at law to recover certain land. The defendant filed an equitable answer and cross-bill, alleging that Samuel Chambers, the father of plaintiff, being the owner of the land, sold it to defendant, and executed a bond for a deed to be made upon the payment of the purchase price. Upon default being made in payment, Samuel Chambers foreclosed the title bond and recovered a judgment thereof, which remains unsatisfied.

Action of mandamus to compel defendants, who are the supervisors of Kossuth county, to levy a tax for the payment of a certain judgment in the name of plaintiff, by him before recovered against the county in the District Court of Palo Alto county.

.Appealfrom Lyon Circuit Cowl. . AotioN upon certain warrants issued by tbe defendant upon its treasurer, and transferred by the payee thereof, Larchwood district township, to plaintiffs. The district township of Larchwood covers territory formerly belonging to defendant. Upon its organization, an equitable division of assets and liabilities of the old district township of Lyon, was made, in the manner required by law, between it and the new district.

This is an action to recover upon a ffre insurance policy issued by the defendant to the plaintiff, upon her dwelling house which was afterwards destroyed by fire. There was a trial to the court, resulting in a judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

■ AotioN upon a policy of insurance on the life of A. P. Bernhard. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals. The facts of the' case involved in the points of law ruled appear in the opinion.

The plaintiff, by bis petition, avers that on June 1, 1872, the- defendant employed the plaintiff to teach its school as principal, at a salary of $900, for tlie usual term, commencing September 2, 1872, and ending June 28, 1873, and tbe plaintiff agreed to teach- therefor. That tlie defendant made a record of such contract iii its book, at the time, as follows: “June 1, 1872, Board of Directors of North McGregor Independent School District met at school house.

<p>1. Practice: construction of statute. Section 50 of the Code of 1873 requires that all actions commenced before the Code took effect shall be conformed to its provisions so far as may be consistent with the substantial rights of the parties,</p> <p>2. -: jury trial. In an action for divorce commenced before the Code took effect, and tried afterward, either of the parties had the right to demand a jury trial.</p>

ON tbe 12th day of June, 1873, plaintiff filed in the Monroe Circuit Court his petition,.in substance stating that lie owns about fifty acres of land, through which Cedar Creek runs in a meandering direction, and over which extends defendant’s railroad, crossing said creek at two points upon bridges numbers 83 and 84, so constructed as not to impede the flow of the creek.

This is an action of replevin for a county warrant, which the plaintiff alleges to be his property, and wrongfully detained from him by the defendants. On a trial by the court, the plaintiff recovered a money judgment for $69.50, and costs, from which defendants appeal. The further facts of the case appear in the opinion.

,' This action was commenced December 12, 1871, in equity, to set.aside a certain contract for tbe sale by tbe plaintiff of tbe swamp lands granted it by tbe state, to tbe. defendant, made June 5, 1862; and also to. set aside the conveyances of said land, under said contract, by tbe county to tbe defendant, one, made January 7, 1867, and tbe other, January 8, 1868. It is not necessary to set out tbe pleadings, as no questions arise tbereon.

This action was commenced before a justice of the peace, and judgment there rendered for plaintiffs. Upon an appeal by defendant to the Circuit Court, a judgment was had in his favor. Plaintiff now’ appeals to this court. The other facts of the case appear in the opinion.

iroiát Gowrt. The plaintiff’s petition states that on or about January 26th, 1872, W. E. Kidder, as principal, and John L. Davies, as surety executed and delivered to the plaintiff their bond as follows: “Know all men by these presents, that I, William E. Kidder, of the town of Davenport, county of Scott, state of Iowa, as principal, and John L. Davies, of the town of Davenport, county of Scott, state of Iowa, as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the Boyal Insurance…

This is an action to enforce a mechanic’s lien. The plaintiffs are lumber dealers and furnished lumber to the defend,ants. Jennings & Co., for the erection of two houses by them, under a contract with the defendant, Thomas Woods, upon lots five and six in block twenty in Curtis & Ramsey’s addition to Council Bluffs. The lien ¿is asked to be enforcéd against the lots, which are the property of the defendant, Woods.

Plaintiff claims of defendant four hundred dollars on his subscription to the stock of plaintiff, three hundred dollars of which is claimed upon a subscription list, and one hundred dollars upon a stock note.

Notion in chancery to set- aside a tax sale, and deed of certain lands on account of fraud in conducting tbe sale. There was a decree granting tbe relief prayed for from which defendants appeal. -The facts of the case fully appear in the opinion.

Appeal fro:m Jasper District Court. ActioN to recover the value of certain corn alleged by plaintiff in his petition to be his property, and wrongfully Converted by the defendant. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals. The facts of the case necessary to an understanding of the points ruled appear in the opinion.

This is an action upon a bond executed by William F. Kidder as principal, in his life time, and by Samuel E. Brown and James D. Campbell, as sureties. On a trial by the court, without a jury, judgment was rendered for the defendants. Plaintiff appeals.

This is a proceeding by motion to require defendant, who is an attorney at law, to pay over certain moneys collected by him as the attorney of plaintiff, in an action wherein plaintiff recovered a judgment in the District Court of Scott county against Garrett & Webb.

AotioN upon a note dated May 20, 1868, executed by F. S. Graham, as follows: “Ten years after date I promise to pay Daniel Hiskey, or order, fifteen hundred dollars, for value received, with interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum, from date until paid. The interest to be paid annually in advance.

The petition alleges that on tho 3d day of June, 1869, Isaac L. Graves, of Dodge county, Wisconsin, made to Wm. L. Graves six promissory notes for $2,200, and to secure the same executed a mortgage on certain land in said county. That on the 4th of December, 1869, Wm. L. Graves sold said notes and mortgage to E. S. Eussell, and the better to secure the same executed to Eussell his mortgage on one hundred and- twenty acres of land in Story county.

Ajppeal from Johnson District Court. BeeleviN for a house which defendant was, at the tim e removing from a lot owned by plaintiff, to his own property. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals.

Appeal from Lee District Court. This is a suit in equity to set aside an award of arbitrators. The District Court found for defendants. The plaintiffs appeal.

ActioN in chancery. The petition alleges that, in 1859, plaintiff was in possession of the N. Sec. 15, Tp. 96, N. E. 20, upon which he had made valuable improvements, having four years before purchased it under a contract with one Long. The title was retained by Long as a security for the payment of the purchase money, and a bond was executed by him for the conveyance of the land upon payment therefor.

This is a proceeding for mandamus. The plaintiff avers that he is a boy aged about sixteen years, is of African descent, a citizen of Keokuk, has attended the graded schools there for several years, has passed the examination requisite to entitle him to admission to the high school, and is of good moral character and otherwise entitled to admission there; that the defendants are directors of said school district, and refuse plaintiff admission thereto because of his descent…

AotioN in chancery to quiet in plaintiff the title of certain lands described in the petition. The defendant sets up title in itself to the lands, and as further defense to tbe action pleads that tbe lands, or a large portion of them, have been, sold and conveyed by plaintiff, and others have been assessed and taxed, and defendant, as required by plaintiff, has paid the taxes thereon, whereby plaintiff is estopped to claim title thereto.

AotioN to recover double tbe value of a cow owned by-plaintiff, alleged to have been killed by a train of cars operated by defendant at a point where the railroad upon which the train was running was not fenced, though the right existed to fence it at the place. The cause was submitted to the court without a jury, and a judgment was rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Action on promissory note, for balance due. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

AotioN at law. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. • The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

AotioN in chancery. The plaintiff alleges in his petition that he brings the action for himself and many other citizens, having a common and general interest with him in the subject of the suit; that he is the owner of certain lots in an addition to the city of Mount Pleasant, which was laid off by defendant McCoy, and certain streets therein were dedicated to the public nse; that the city council, by resolution, authorized McCoy and other defendants to enclose and fence up…

This is a suit in equity to quiet plaintiff’s title to certain property, to set aside tbe defendant’s, Sarah Bennett’s, claim thereto, and to enjoin any interference with the property until final adjudication, and for general and special relief. O. B. Bennett, John Bennett, Sarah Bennett, and Boring & Bennett are made defendants.

This is an action by plaintiff as assignee ot two promissory notes for $500 each, executed by John Collins, and dated April 25, 1868, payable to A. S. Blakeslee or bearer on the first days of May, 1870 and 1871, respectively, and to foreclose a mortgage executed to secure the same.

- The plaintiff filed his petition in equity alleging that on the 28th day of July, 1869, Isaac Conard and Reuben C. Porter were the owners of certain real property, particularly described, which they held by warranty deed dated August 4th, 1866, and recorded in Jasper county, Iowa; that on the 19th day of December, 1872, said Conard and Porter conveyed said real property to the plaintiff by deed, duly recorded in said county; that prior to said conveyance to the plaintiff,…

The defendant was indicted for the crime of embezzlement of public money, while treasurer of Sioux county. Upon a trial to a jury he was acquitted. The state appeals.

AotioN of replevin for 2500 bushels of shelled corn. The jietition alleges that one James Armour, as plaintiff’s factor and agent, and with money furnished by plaintiff, purchased the said corn and hired the same shelled, and caused it to be stored for plaintiff in a certain crib adjoining and attached to a warehouse lately occupied by said Armour, and that the defendant E. B. Price wrongfully detains possession thereof from plaintiff.

AotioN upon a policy of insurance against fire, issued to plaintiff, covering a stock of dry goods and merchandise. The petition avers tbe loss of the property and other facts entitling plaintiff to recover.

The defendant was indicted in the District Court of Wapello county for the crime of manslaughter in the killing of L. S. Barker, on the 8th of December, 1869. The indictment, with the other papers in the case, was transferred to the District Court of Des Moines county for trial, where, on the 26th day of September, 1873, the defendant was convicted of the crime charged iu the indictment. From the judgment rendered against him he appeals to this court. •

Plaintiffs, who are commission merchants of Salt Lake City, brought this action to recover for a balance due from defendant on account of advances made by them upon a quantity of butter, chickens, and eggs consigned to them, or received by them for sale. The proceeds of the sale of the consignment, after paying expenses and charges, did not equal the advances made thereon by plaintiffs; the action is to recover the balance.

Appeal from Glinton Distriot Oourt ActioN in chancery to compel the specific performance of a contract for the sale of lands by defendant to plaintiff. After a trial upon tbe merits, plaintiff’s petition was dismissed; be now appeals to tbis court.

W. E. Berry was in the employment of defendant, and was killed, it is claimed, whilst in the discharge of his duty, by the negligence of defendant’s employes. The plaintiff, the administratrix, brings this action to recover the damages sustained by the estate. There was a jury trial, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $5,000. Defendant appeals. The material facts are stated in the opinion.

The plaintiff, a physician, commenced his action before E. W. Mitchell, a justice of the peace, for the recovery of $15.00, on account of professional services rendered to Mrs. Lush, in October, 1878. The account was properly sworn to, and'the township trustees certified to it as follows: “ We, the trustees of Palo Alto township, hereby certify that we employed Hr. II.

This is a proceeding wherein plaintiff claimed damages,, accruing to the estate of which she is administratrix, on account of the vacation,- by the action of the county, of a public road upon which land of the estate abuts. There was a judgment for defendant, from which plaintiff appeals.

Aotion on a policy of insurance upon the joint lives of Charles W. Burlingame and Loretta C. Burlingamé, for the sum of $5,000, to be paid to the survivor upon the death of either. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, the assignee of the policy. Defendant appeals. The facts of the case necessary to a proper understanding of tbe points ruled in tbe opinion appear therein.

UpoN the petition of defendants a certain highway in Jackson county was vacated for the distance of one mile; it was not interfered with further. Plaintiff, at the proper time and in the proper manner, made application to the Supervisors for damages sustained by him on account of the vacation ordered. He is the owner of land situated upon the highway, but not upon the part vacated, which commences about thirty rods from his farm.

•, This is an action to recover the value of 842 bushels of barley, and the sacks containing it, transported from Wheat-land, Clinton county, to Chicago upon defendant’s cars, and not delivered to the consignee.

This action is brought by the plaintiff, to set aside a conveyance of lands' from Zadock Williams and wife, to the defendant, their daughter, for the alleged reasons that the same was made with the intent to defraud creditors; and that plaintiff is a judgment creditor of the grantor, Zadock Williams. On a trial hy the court below a decree was entered for the plain-liff. Defendant appeals.

Af peal from Jones District Court. AotioN upon an account for goods sold by plaintiffs to defendants. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiffs; defendant Sbaw appeals. The facts of tbe case appear in the opinion.

Tee plaintiff claims §208, balance of an account for medicines and board furnished, and medical services rendered W. 0. Johnson, in his lifetime. The answer alleges that, in the fall of 1873, the decedent settled the account in full.- There was a jury trial, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $150. The defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion.

This action was commenced on the 29th of June, 1870. On the 25th of November, 1872, plaintiff filed an amended petition, in substance alleging that on the 4th day of December, 1869, Margaret Wood, the wife of plaintiff, died intestate, leaving the defendants Mary E.v Minnie R., and Howard K. Brolliar, her children by her former husband, .and Pettie Wood and Maggie Urmy, her children by her marriage with plaintiff, as her sole surviving heirs at law.

The defendant was indicted and convicted of obstructing a highway, and appeals to this court. The facts of the case involved in the points ruled appear in the opinion.

This is an action upon a covenant of warranty, in a conveyance by tbe defendant to tlie plaintiff, of the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of section thirty-four, township seventy-nine, range twelve, west. The issues are as to the breach and the measure of damages. i There was a jury trial resulting in. a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, for ninety .dollars. The defendant appeals.

AotioN to recover an alleged balance due from the defend-, ant, as treasurer for the plaintiff.

. ON tbe 8th of November, 1873., .plaintiff commenced before O. A. Meredith an action of replevin for a certain Waltham watch of the value of $45.00. On the 10th day of the same month, the parties agreed that Thomas Cady, constable, might be substituted as defendant. On November 15th, 1873, a jury trial .was had in said justice’s court, and verdict was returned, and judgment was entered for plaintiff.

This is an action upon the official bond of defendant, Teel-ing, who was duly qualified as Clerk of the District Court of Floyd county in 1869, to recover certain moneys deposited with his predecessor in office as a tender in a cause pending in the court of which he was clerk, and received by him upon assuming the office. The money was paid to Teeling.

This is an action in equity to enjoin the collection of taxes upon certain lands of plaintiff, for the years 1870 and 1871, upon the ground that they were not subject to taxation for those years, because the patents therefor, were not made to plaintiff by the Governor until July 1871, and the road was not completed nor the lands earned until that time, and the partition of the lands of the grant between the plaintiff, the D. & S. C. E. E. Co., and the Tete de Morts Branch…

The plaintiff filed in tbe Marion Circuit Court its petition, in substance stating that during tlie year 1872, the District Township of Washington, in Marion County, was organized and acting as a school district, and, while so acting, for services rendered in sub-district No. 9 therein, as a teacher, by one Benjamin S. Kirk, it issued to him on the 6th day of August, 1872, an order on the teacher’s fund for ninety dollars, which order, the said Kirk about the 10th day of…

This is an action for an alleged breach of promise of marriage. The answer denies the allegations of the petition. There was a jury trial, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $2,750.00. The defendant appeals.

This is an action of mandamus to compel the defendant to pay the amount of a certain judgment which plaintiff recovered against the district township of Holman. The cause was submitted to the court on substantially the following agreed statement of facts: The district township of ITolman is a corporation organized under the laws of Iowa for school purposes, and W. H. Morrison is its treasurer.

Suit in equity by plaintiffs who arc the owners of lots fronting on Garden Square in Pella, to enjoin defendant, who now claims to own - the same, from laying it off into lots and erecting buildings thereon. The plaintiffs aver that the lot's owned by them were purchased of IT.

RepleviN for goods shipped by plaintiffs to one Lutz, at Osage, which were siezed upon an attachment by defendant, Piper, issued in an action by bis co-defendants. The goods were transported upon the Illinois Central Railroad, which is also made a defendant. The plaintiff claims the goods as the vendor thereof under the right of stoppage in transitu. The defendants claim as attaching creditors of the consignee of the goods.

<p> Appeal from Leo Circuit Ooti/rt. </p> <p>Action of replevin. -Plaintiff appeals.</p>

<p>1. Evidence: bastaedy: peIjjudice. In a bastardy proceeding-defendant offered to prove that plaintiff had declared to another her purpose of returning to his house that she might become the mother of a child, and it was in evidence that she did return -with his consent: sH'eld, that he was not prejudiced by a refusal to admit the testimony.</p> <p>2.-: -. Where the lewdness of plaintiff was sufficiently estab- , lished by admitted evidence, there was no error in the rejection of other evidence tending to the same result.</p> <p>3. -: -. Notwithstanding the doubt which might be raised as to the paternity of the child, by plaintiff's connexion with other men at about the time it was begotten, yet other facts may be' introduced sufficient to satisfy the jury of defendant’s liability.</p> <p>4. Bastardy: action. It is not error to instruct the jury that the object of a bastardy proceeding is to protect the county from the expense of supporting an illegitimate child.</p>

. The petition alleges that, by continued and uninterrupted úse for more than twenty-one years, a certain road leading along Four Mile Creek, in the county of Polk, from the cou.nty road leading from Des Moines to Rising Sun to the Des Moines and Delphi road, has become a public highway. That the defendants have obstructed the said highway by building fences and erecting gates across the same, and locking the • gates, thereby entirely obstructing travel.

-The plaintiff, after dark, on tbe evening of August 21st, 1872, whilst passing along Sixth street in the City of Des Moines, on his way home, stepped 'down a perpendicular declivity of eighteen inches in the street, and severely injured his left ankle. On account of this injury he claims of the defendant $15,000 dupages. There was a jury trial, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $7,500. Defendant appeals.

DuriNG the February term, 1874, at which this cause was pending, defendant amended the answer and the cause was continued at the costs'of defendant. Plaintiff demanded that, in addition to the ordinary costs of the term, extra compensation be taxed in favor of two persons summoned, as claimed by counsel, as experts.

The plaintiff, in the first count of his petition, alleges that he recovered two judgments against the Waterloo Agricultural Works, an acting corporation doing business at the city of Waterloo, aggregating the sum of $3,904.46, and costs. That the defendants are stockholders and owners and holders of shares of the stock of said Waterloo Agricultural Works.

This is a suit in equity in wbicb tlie plaintiffs ask a rescission of a contract for the conveyance, of certain real property, entered into between John White, in his lifetime, and the plaintiffs, and for other relief. The court below rendered, judgment granting to plaintiffs a portion of the relief prayed. Defendants appeal. The facts necessary to an understanding of the questions decided are stated in the opinion.

This is an action to foreclose a mortgage executed on tbe 15th day of February, 1873, by tbe defendants William and Elizabeth Hayzlett, to secure the payment of four promissory notes, executed to C. B. Bradshaw, aggregating the sum of $2,061.00. The mortgage was filed for record February 27, 1873.

This is an action for the recovery of damages of defendant for falsely and maliciously declaring, in the presence and hearing of divers persons, “ That plaintiff, Henry Myers,' was a thief, that Henry Myers, plaintiff, had stolen a load of lumber from, his, (defendant’s) farm.” The answer denies all the allegations of the petition.

Aotion in replevin. There was a verdict for plaintiff, which was set aside npon motion of defendant, on the ground of, misconduct of a juror. Erom the order granting a new trial plaintiff appeals.

This is a suit in equity to quiet the title to lots eight and nine, in block eighteen, in the town of East Des Moines, Polk county, Iowa, in the plaintiffs, who composed the firm of Laird Pros. The defendants are the administrator and heirs of Henry Courtney, now deceased. The District Court quieted the title in the plaintiffs. The defendants appeal.

Ajjpeal from Mitehell District Gourt. On the 20th of June, 187.3, plaintiff filed bis petition claiming of defendant the sum of $2,000.00, on account of an alleged willful and malicious assault and battery, averring that the blows inflicted by defendant ruptured the membrane of plaintiff’s abdomen, causing a painful and dangerous hernia. The defendant, for answer— 1. Denies every allegation of the petition. 2.

This action is brought by the plaintiff to recover damages of the defendant for tearing down and removing plaintiff’s fence.

<p> Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court. </p>

<p> Appeal from Floyd Circuit Court. </p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion.</p>

Action in chancery. Plaintiff is the widow of Benjamin Wicks and defendants, are the administrators of his estate and his heirs. The petition alleges that plaintiff in the lifetime of deceased, and after her marriage with him, furnished him, as a loan, $200 which she had inherited from her father’s estate. The money was invested in land which is now the property of the estate.

<p> Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. </p>

Action to foreclose a mortgage. The mortgagor was made a party. The other defendants are judgment creditors of Curren who made default in the action. The lien holders as a defense to the action set up that plaintiff, who is the assignee of the mortgage, purchased it with the money of Curren, and for his benefit; that this act was fraudulent, because done with the intent to aid.

Action in chancery. There was a decree in the District Court settling the rights of the parties from which defendants appeal. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

Suit in equity to quiet title to the north-east quarter of section 8, township 79, range 43. The defendant claims title in himself, and by a cross petition, asks to have the title quieted in him. The District Court quieted the title in the plaintiff. The defendant appeals.

Action in chancery to enforce the specific performance of a contract to convey certain lands to defendant. .There was a decree granting the relief prayed for in the petition. Defendants appeal.

<p>Appeal. Will be dismissed where no substantial rights are involved.</p>

The defendant is indicted with Ursula Spangler for the murder, on April 4,1873, of a female child about six weeks old. The indictment is for murder in the first degree, and charges the offense in two counts: first, that it was committed by breaking the neck of the child, and second by drowning. The defendant, Wm. Riley, was tried first, and separate from the other defendant. The defendant filed a plea of not guilty.

Plaintiee, as administratrix of the estate of Edwin J. Clark, deceased, claims of the defendant the sum of $1,600, as the purchase price of eighty acres of land sold by Edwin J. Clark to the defendant. The defendant, in his answer, admits the purchase from Edwin J. Clark, in his lifetime, of the eighty acres of land described in the petition, and that the price agreed upon was $1,600.

Hughes. The petition alleges the recovery of the judgment, the ownership of the lands by the defendant named, but that the title of record appears in the other defendants, having been conveyed to them for fraudulent purposes. The answer of defendants denies the allegations of the petition, except that it admits the ownership of the land to be in James Q. Hughes, defendant, and sets up that it constitutes his homestead.

Tins is a proceeding in equity for a divorce and alimony, on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment of the wife hy the husband.

The record shows that the plaintiff replevied from the defendant a sewing machine, and on the final hearing of the case recovered a money judgment for fifty-five dollars and costs, upon which judgment execution was issued and placed in the hands of the sheriff; that after the issuance of the execution the defendant purchased a claim and procured judgment thereon against the plaintiff before a justice of the peace, and caused execution to be issued thereon and placed in the…

<p> Appeal from, Jaclcson Circuit Court. </p> <p>On motion to set aside order of affirmance..</p>

<p> Appeal from Louisa Circuit Court. </p>

<p> Appeal from Lee Circuit Court. </p>

On the 13th day of June, 1873, the plaintiff filed in the Jones Circuit Court a petition stating that on the 4th day of September. 1872, he owned the undivided one-half of certain premises described, which he continued to own until the 27th day of December, 1872, when he became the owner in fee simple of all of said premises.

This is a suit in equity brought to establish and settle a partnership formed for the purpose of trading in fat cattle, sheep and hogs. The issues made by the pleadings and the ultimate facts established by the evidence, are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The District Court found for the defendant, and dismissed the plaintiff’s petition at their costs. The plaintiffs appeal.