¶1On Motion to Dismiss.
¶2The opinion of the court was delivered by
¶3This is a partition suit on which a claim for rent has been engrafted.
¶4The plaintiff, Mrs. Oxford, claims to be the owner, to the extent of one-fifth thereof, of 840 acres of improved land, in common with her two brothers, and her sister and her mother, who each owns a like proportion.
¶5She claims rents of the property from her mother, from the time of her marriage, in the fall of 1883, with James M. Barrow.
¶6The defense is, that plaintiff is owner of one-eighth only, and not entitled to any rent. Various counter claims are set up against her.
¶7A judgment was rendered below, on the issues presented by the parties, which has satisfied neither of them.
¶8The plaintiff has appealed from that judgment, and the defendant^ Mrs. Barrow, after moving to dismiss the appeal, has prayed for an amendment of it, in several respects.
¶9The motion to dismiss is based on thé ground of want of jurisdiction ratione materiae.
¶10*865It is without foundation.
¶11The property, the partition of which is sought, is. valued at $1900, although appraised in an inventory found in the .record at $2100; and the claim for rent, during about seven years at $150,,aggregates some $1050, if not more.
¶12This court is surely competent to pass upon the merits of a controversy involving such matters. .
¶13The motion to dismiss is denied.