Volume 48 — Iowa Reports

Action in chancery to set aside a tax deed, and to quiet title to real property, the possession of which plaintiff held under a claim of title. By a cross-petition, defendants set up title under a tax sale and deed to the property, and prayed that their title be quieted. The relief sought by plaintiff was granted, and defendants’ cross-petition was dismissed. Defendants appeal.

<p> Appeal from Appanoose District Court. </p> <p>The plaintiff claims $607.25, alleged to be due on a promissory note. The defendant, for answer, alleges that the note was executed for tbe purchase price of two hundred and seventy-six sheep; that after the defendant had concluded to buy plaintiff’s flock of sheep the plaintiff, with intent to defraud defendant, turned into the flock about sixty diseased and scabby sheep, which before had been separated from the flock, and that at the time of the sale of said sheep they were infected and had a contagious disease, commonly known as the scab, and were, therefore, sold contrary to law.</p> <p>The jury returned a general verdict for the plaintiff for the amount of the note and interest, and also returned the following special verdict:</p> <p>1. Was the note in this case given for sheep sold by the plaintiff to defendant ? Yes.</p> <p>2. At the time of the sale of said sheep, did the sheep have a contagious disease? Yes.</p> <p>3. Di'd the plaintiff know that they were so diseased at the time of the sale to defendant ? Yes.</p> <p>4. How many of the sheep were diseased, if any, at the time of the sale ? Thirty head.</p> <p>5. Hid defendant know, when he bought the sheep, that they were diseased with the scab, or any of them ? Yes.</p> <p>6. Did the plaintiff know, at the time he sold the sheep to defendant, that the disease called scab was a contagious disease ? No.</p> <p>The motion to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial was overruled, and judgment was entered upon the verdict. The defendant appeals.</p>

<p> Appeal from, Shelby Circuit Court. </p>

<p> Appeal from Dubuque Circuit Cou/rt. </p> <p>This action involves the construction of a will. The facts fully appear in the opinion. The plaintiff, with defendant James B. Kyne, in his own right and as guardian, and Absalom Cain, executor, appeals.</p>

Action upon a promissory note. The defendant's plead usury. Previous to the execution of the note in suit, the plaintiff held a larger note, executed by one Chambers as principal and the defendants as sureties, which note was usurious. Before its maturity, the defendants took it up, paying a part of the amount thereof in money, and giving their note for the balance. This action is brought upon the latter note. The court sustained the plea of usury, and the plaintiff appeals.

Action at law upon an account for goods sold and delivered to defendant. The answer alleges that the goods wore sold by plaintiffs, upon the order of a railroad company, and it was agreed between the plaintiffs, defendants, and company, that the latter should pay plaintiffs for the goods; and that it paid the account by its note secured by mortgage bonds, which were accepted by plaintiffs in full payment of the account.

It is alleged in the petition that the plaintiff is the father of Ettie Nitz, a female child, of the age of about two years, and that defendant is the mother of said child; that defendant has said child in her care and custody, and under her control; that she is an improper person to have the control and education of said child, for that she is a woman of grossly immoral character, and of lewd, vicious, and brutal habits and conduct.

<p> Appeal from Lee Circuit Court. </p> <p>In August, 1871, the defendants, Louisa Bohkar and Edward Bohkar, executed to the plaintiff a mortgage on certain real estate described in the petition, and whichj on the same day, was duly filed for record in the recorder’s office. This action is brought to foreclose the same. Certain persons were made defendants, who, it is alleged, were junior lien holders, or claimed some interest in the premises; but that whatever that interest was it is junior to that of plaintiff.</p> <p>The decree of the Circuit Court settled and adjusted the liens and claims of said parties, and no question is made as to the correctness thereof on this appeal.</p> <p>At the time the mortgage was executed, there were on said premises certain buildings, which were afterward destroyed by fire, and in 1875 and 1876 the intervenors, John Wilson and others, as mechanics and material men, under a contract with Louisa and Edward Bohkar, erected other buildings in the place of those destroyed, and they, by proper pleadings, seek to have their lien, as such, established and enforced.</p> <p>The court found the real estate, without the buildings, was of the value of $1,200, and with the buildings, it was of the value of $2,000.</p> <p>It was further found and decreed that plaintiff’s mortgage was a prior lien on the real estate, as it existed before the buildings were erected, and that the intervenors had the prior lien on the buildings. The premises were ordered to be sold together — that is, the land and buildings. The costs were decreed to be first paid, and if the remaining proceeds were insufficient to pay the plaintiff and intervenors, the plaintiff was to receive 12-20 and the intervenors 8-20 of such proceeds. The plaintiff appeals.</p>

Action in Chancery. There was a decree in the court below granting the relief prayed for in the plaintiff’s petition. Defendant appeals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

<p>1. Evidence:-seduction: corroboration of prosecutrix. In tlie tria! of an indictment for seduction, tlie infant alleged to be the fruit thereof cannot be offered in evidence to corroborate tlie prosecutrix by reason of a supposed resemblance between the child and the ,*' . , defendant.</p>

William Cadwallader filed a petition in the Mahaska District Court, claiming of James Gunsaulis and John Gunsaulisthe sum of $264.50. On the 15th day of April, 1876, the defendants in that action caused to be served upon Cadwallader a written notice, as follows: “You are hereby notified that defendants in the above entitled cause, by way of compromise, offer to confess judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of twenty-six dollars, and all costs accrued up to this date.

Action upon two promissory notes. The petition contains three counts, the first and second upon the two notes respectively, and the third states that each of the notes provides for an attorney’s fee for the collection thereof, if the notes are not paid when due. It further states that the notes are due; that the defendants have failed to pay the same; and that six hundred dollars would be a reasonable attorney’s fee. Answer was made to the last count only.

The plaintiff filed its petition against O. W. Potter, Samuel E. Mumford, George H. Wyman, and T. C. Owen, executors of the estate of Eber Ward, deceased, representing that about May 10, 1873, plaintiff entered into a written contract with the Burlington and Southwestern Bailway Company, agreeing to rent said company certain rolling stock, to be used upon said railway company’s road, at eight dollars per day for each locomotive; that about May 10, 1873, in accordance…

The defendant, as sheriff, under an execution against the plaintiff levied on and took possession of a building owned by plaintiff in which he carried on his trade or business of photographing, and this action was brought to recover possession of said building. There was a trial by the court, a finding of facts, and judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals.

The petition in substance alleges that on June 17, 1875, an execution issued from the Poweshiek Circuit Court, upon a judgment wherein W. J. Johnson is plaintiff, and W. H. McDonald and Henry McDonald are defendants, for the amount of $40.50, with interest and costs, and that under said execution the sheriff, by his deputy, levied upon a certain described forty acres of land; that said deputy sheriff failed to post written or printed notices of the time and place of sale, in…

The plaintiff claims to own the southeast quarter of the quarter section, and the defendants the southwest quarter of the quarter section, and to a fence parallel to and standing about five rods east of the east line of the last described forty. The question is as to ■whether the fence is the division line between the parties. The quarter section is fractional.

Action in equity to subject certain premises to the payment of a claim held by the plaintiff against the defendant, Halliday. Decree for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.

Appieal from Johnson Distinct Cowi't. Action by the receiver of the Iowa and Minnesota Construction Company, to recover of defendant, a stockholder, assessments made upon his stock. The defendant filed an answer setting up divers defenses, some of an equitable character. To the answer a demurrer was sustained, and defendant appealed from this ruling. Other facts appear in the opinion.

This action was brought to recover $1,175 for certain cattle which plaintiff averred he had sold to the defendant. The defendant denied that he had purchased said cattle from the plaintiff. He alleged that the plaintiff and one Pleasant Enix were equal partners in the ownership of the cattle, and that the sale was made from plaintiff and said Pleasant Enix, to defendant, as a partnership transaction, and that he had paid the partnership the full contract price.

An action to recover for injuries to the person and property of plaintiff, sustained by the falling of a bridge while he was ’ crossing it. After plaintiff had submitted his testimony at the trial the cause was withdrawn from the jury, on the ground that plaintiff had offered no testimony tending to support his cause of action, and judgment was rendered against him for costs, from which he appeals. Other facts of the ease appear in the opinion.

<p> Appeal from O’Brien Circuit Cou/rt. </p> <p>The plaintiff averred in the petition that in June, 1871, he was about to take and occupy a certain tract of government land, as a pre-emption, under the laws of the United States, ■and that he made a verbal agreement with the defendant, by which the defendant was to do some breaking on said land, and to take care of and protect for plaintiff his rights in and to said land, and to notify plaintiff of any and all claims which might be made on or to said premises, as against plaintiff, during the time plaintiff might be absent therefrom; that thereupon plaintiff made pre-emption of, and took said land under said pre-emption laws, and paid to defendant ten •dollars on said contract; that after commencing the performance of said contract, and while pretending that he was carrying out the conditions thereof, the defendant, without plaintiff’s knowledge or consent, and with intent to cheat and wrong the plaintiff, did fraudulently procure to himself a. homestead right to said premises, and destroyed plaintiff’s rights thereto, to the damage of the plaintiff in the sum of' one thousand dollars.</p> <p>The defendant denied the alleged contract, and averred that, the same was illegal and void, and in violation of the laws of the United States, governing pre-emptions.</p> <p>The cause was referred. The referee reported that plaintiff should have judgment for two hundred dollars.</p> <p>The report of the referee was approved by the court, and a judgment was rendered accordingly. Defendant appeals.</p>

<p>1. Practice: certificate of judge: bill of exceptions. A certificate of the trial judge, made a year after the trial, to the effect that the evidence contained in the abstract was all the evidence submitted upon the trial, is not a compliance with the statute, and the bill of exceptions may be stricken from the record upon motion.</p> <p>2. -: change of venue : new tbial. Pending an axiplication for a new trial upon the ground of newly discovered evidence, made subsequent to the trial term, a change of venue may be granted upon a. proxier showing therefor.</p>

The petition states defendants are owners of certain real estate described therein, and that plaintiffs applied to one Johnson, their agent, to purchase the same; that afterwards, Johnson informed plaintiffs he had received a letter from defendants stating they would sell a portion of said real estate for $650; that plaintiffs accepted said proposition, and re- ' quested Johnson- to procure a deed therefor; that in pursuance of said offer and acceptance defendants executed…

The petition states that plaintiff is entitled to the immediate possession of certain land therein described, and that he is the owner in fee simple; that the defendant wrongfully keeps him out of possession thereof. An abstract of title is attached to the petition, from which it appears that the plaintiff claims title and possession under and through a tax deed executed the 6th day of January, 1868, and recorded on the 28th day of the same month.

This is an action of replevin for seven hundred and forty-new oak fence posts, of which plaintiff alleges he is the absolute and unqualified owner, and which, he avers, the defendant wrongfully detains from plaintiff, the alleged cause of detention being that defendant cut the posts on section 1, township 88, range 29, the premises of plaintiff.

<p>1. Municipal Corporation: improvement oe street: assessment. Under section 466 of tlie Code, cities are authorized to pass an ordinance assessing upon a corner lot the cost of macadamizing one-fourth of tire square formed by the intersection of the streets. Adams, J.,</p>

Action to enjoin the defendant from operating a ferry across the Mississippi river, between the city of Burlington and the opposite shore. The plaintiff claims the exclusive right to operate a ferry across the Mississippi river at the city of Burlington. It predicates such right upon an ordinance of the city, the first and second sections of which are in the following words: “Section 1. Therefore, he it ordered hy the City Council of the City of Burlington.

Defendant Chamberlain intervened in the action, and answered the petition, alleging that “he is now, and previous to the time of raising the mineral claimed by plaintiff he was, the owner of an adit level running through the premises of plaintiff, made for the purpose of draining the mineral lands through which it runs, including the lands of said plaintiff; that by said level the lands of plaintiff were drained of water, and by reason thereof the mineral * * * * * was…

The plaintiff commenced in the Hardin District Court an action at law against the defendant, Geo. W. Harn, to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract. An attachment was issued therein, and certain lands were attached as 'the property of said defendant. The intervener filed in said action a petition of intervention, in which she claimed the said land belonged to her, and asked that her rights thereto be adjudicated.

The appellees are creditors of the estate, and, as such, filed a. motion'in the Circuit Court stating that the deceased, at the time of “his death, was acting as a land agent, paying taxes, selling lands, etc., for non-residents and others, and kept a book containing a list of the names and addresses of correspondents and persons whom he did business for as a land agent, and such names and addresses constituted the good will of such business, and, by rea:: m thereof, is of…

The plaintiff claims of the defendant the sum of $961.23. The cause was submitted to the court upon the pleadings, and the following agreed statement of facts: 1. That prior to January 25,1867, the plaintiff and defendant constituted and composed sub-district No. 5 of Burr Oak Township in said county. . 2.

Action to foreclose a mortgage executed by the defendant C. D. Hunt. The defendant M. E. Griffin is now the owner of the premises, having purchased and taken a conveyance of them subsequent to the execution of the mortgage. He disputes the validity of the mortgage upon two grounds.

Action upon a promissory note. The defendants answered, admitting their signatures to the note, and averring that after the delivery thereof the plaintiff, without the knowledge or consent of defendants, changed the same, by erasing certain words therefrom, so as to make it draw interest from date instead of after maturity.

The defendant was convicted of grand larceny and sentenced to the penitentiary for one year. He appeals to this court. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

Action in equity to restrain the enforcement of, and set aside a judgment at law. The Circuit Court denied the relief asked, and the plaintiff appeals.

<p> Appeal from Fayette Circuit Court. </p> <p>On the 1st clay of September, 1876, the plaintiff filed in the Circuit Court his petition, alleging that a judgment had been rendered against him, in favor of the defendants, by a justice of the peace, on the 14th day of August, 1876, for the sum of $100 and $6.25 costs, which had been erroneously entered, and that the justice had no power or jurisdiction to render the same. ' A writ of error was prayed and issued. Upon the justice filing his return thereto, a hearing was had, and the judgment of the justice affirmed, and the plaintiff appeals.</p>

In July, 18T5, plaintiff commenced an action against the defendant Winser, for the foreclosure of two mortgages upon certain real estate. .

This is a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Dubuque District Court, in which it is alleged the said court has exceeded its jurisdiction, and ordered that to be done for which there is no authority in law. The facts averred in the petition are in substance as follows ■: Henry Kennedy was the holder of a certain school order issued by the district township of Julien, November 8, 1873.

Action at law. The case was submitted to the court with- • out a'jury, and judgment rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

The plaintiff furnished, labor and material for the erection, of a school-house in the district township of Julien, and the' district township became indebted to him therefor in the sum of $350.61, which is still unpaid. After the indebtedness was contracted, the district township organization was abandoned, and the several sub-districts were organized as independent' districts. No division of the assets and liabilities was made.

In 1858 plaintiff commenced an action in the Mitchell District Court against defendant, upon an account for goods sold. It was averred in the petition that defendant was a non-resident of the State, and a writ of attachment was issued upon that ground.

Action in chancery to foreclose a mortgage upon real estate by a transferee thereof. The petition shows that by an instrument duly recorded, it is claimed the mortgage was satisfied and the lien thereof discharged, but alleges that it has no such.effect, for the reason that the plaintiff acquired the' mortgage by a transfer from the mortgagee before the attempt to discharge the lien of the mortgage.

<p>1. Practice in the Supreme Court: assignment of errors. An appeal will be dismissed if the assignment of errors is not served on the appellee ten days before the first day of the trial term. Whether or not it must be filed with the clerk previous to the day devoted to consideration of causes from the district whence comes the appeal, guare.</p>

Action to recover upon a* contract made by tbe defendant with one Reichard for the plaintiff’s benefit. ' Reichard had entered into a contract to erect a college building for the defendant. After a part of the work had been performed, he became embarrassed. He was owing several laborers who had done-work on the building, and was unable to pay them. The plaintiff was one of the laborers. Reichard owed him $165.50, the amount claimed in this action.

The plaintiff and defendant entered .into the following contract. “.This contract or article of agreement made and entered into this 4th day of January, 1871, by and between the county of Crawford, in the State of Iowa, by the board of supervisors, this day in session in said county, of the first part, and Jesse W. Denison, of the same county, of the second part, witnesseth: That, whereas, the said county has never as yet received any benefit from the act of Congress known…

Action to recover double the value.of a mare killed on the ■defendant’s road- in August, 1872. Jury trial, verdict and judgment for plaintiff. The defendant appeals.

The indictment charged the defendant with stealing two horses, the property of W. W. Westbrook, of the value of two hundred dollars each. Having been found guilty, and sentenced as provided by law, he appeals.

1 Action upon a promissory note. The defense was payment. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict for the plaintiff. A motion for a new trial was sustained, and plaintiff appeals.

The plaintiff sues Wm. L. and Augusta M. Graves, as the makers, and Silas Thomas as the indorser of a promissory note for the sum of $175, payable to the order of Silas Thomas. The defendants, Wm. L. and Augusta M. Graves, answered, alleging that the note was executed and delivered ,on the 27th day of October, 1872, which was Sunday, but by mistake it was dated on and as though it was made on the ¡26th day of October.

Appeal from Madison Di-trict Court. An action a,t law to recover land. There was a verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Action in equity to set aside a sheriff’s sale of land, The land was sold as the property of one Hicks, execution defendant. Landaur & Co., defendants in this action, were the execution creditors, and purchasers at the sale. They purchased with notice from Hicks that Morris owned the land, and that Hicks never had any interest in it. No deed has yet been executed.

<p>X. Negligence: presumption op: cake required. Proof of tlie occurrence of an accident which, under ordinary circumstances, would not have happened if due care had been exercised, raises a presumption of negligence, and to rebut this presumption the defendant must show that in the selection and operation of the machinery which caused, or contributed to, tlie accident, he used due care, skill, and prudence, but. he is not required to furnish a satisfactory explanation-of the cause of the accident to relieve himself from liability.</p>

Appeal from Webster Circuit Court. In chancery. A demurrer' to the petition was sustained. Plaintiffs appeal. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

The plaintiff asks judgment against the defendants Skinner, Jenkins and Ridley for the amount of a promissory note, and prays the foreclosure of a mortgage executed to secure the same, and asks that the estate and interest of the defendant G-. L. Henderson in and to the mortgaged premises be declared junior and inferior to plaintiff’s mortgage.

The plaintiff alleges that on the 9th day of April, 1875, he was a breeder of reputed fine thoroughbred stock of the kind known as short-horns, and that, on said day, an ill-bred, unregistered and unpedigreed bull, belonging to defendant, unlawfully at large in the highway, served and got with calf plaintiff’s two year old heifer, called “Royal Butterfly, ” which is reputed to be registered in American Herd Book, vol. 13, p. 926, to the damage of plaintiff in the sum of five…

On the 9th day of July, 1874, the defendant, who was the owner of the patent title of the land, commenced an action against the plaintiff to quiet his title, alleging that he had held adverse possession for more than five years after said tax deed was recorded. The result of said action was, that defendant obtained a decree quieting his title. The land was sold for taxes for the years 1861-2, which plaintiff paid at the time of the sale.

Tee plaintiff, the grandson of Catherine Hanlon, claims •that by inheritance from Catherine Hanlon, and purchase from another of her heirs, he is the owner of an undivided four 'twenty-first parts of a certain forty acres of land of which the -said Catherine Hanlon died seized. The plaintiff makes the other heirs of Catherine Hanlon parties defendant,- and asks partition of the real estate described. The defendant, A. F. Hanlon, alone answered.

<p> Appeal from Poweshiek Circuit Court. </p> <p>On the 5th clay of December, 1874, there was filed in the office of the township clerk of Pleasant township, Poweshiek county, by the township trustees, their assessments of the damages sustained by the plaintiff by the trespassing of defendant’s cattle, as follows:</p> <p>“We, the undersigned, trustees of Pleasant township, in Poweshiek county, State of Iowa, having been called on this day by Alexander Duffees to appraise the damage done to him by about one hundred and fifteen head of cattle which he had distrained for damages done to him, do hereby certify that we have this day visited the damaged premises, and report that said Duffees has sustained damages from the trespassing of said cattle in the sum of seventy dollars. We further fix the amount of pay to which said Duffees is entitled per day for keeping said stock, from the time of distraining till the day of sale, at seven dollars per day. We have also fixed the day when said stock, or so much thereof as shall be necessary to pay the damages and costs of keeping, shall be sold, as Tuesday, the 15th day of December, A. D. 1874, at 2 o’clock p. m., at the yard of Alexander Duffees, where said cattle are distrained; and we have this day posted up notices of said sale in three conspicuous and public places in said township of Pleasant. Witness our hands this 5th day of December, 1874.”</p> <p>On the 7th day o'f December, 1874, the defendant filed in the office of the township clerk of said township his appeal bond in the sum of two hundred dollars, and on the same day he gave notice of appeal from the assessment of damages. The cause came on for trial in the Circuit Court before a jury, and a verdict -vas returned for the defendant.</p> <p>The plaintiff appeals.</p>

Replevin for cattle and horses described in the petition. Defendant demurred to the petition; the demurrer was overruled, and defendant standing thereon, judgment was rendered for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

<p>1. Pardon: power to grant conditional. The Governor of the Stale has the power to annex to a pardon any condition precedent or subsequent, provided it be not illegal, immoral, or impossible to be performed.</p> <p>2. -: revocation op. Where a pardon was granted upon certain conditions, and it was stipulated therewith that upon any violation of such conditions the party pardoned should be liable to summary arrest, and to confinmenl in the penitentiary for the remainder of the term for which he had been sentenced, and it was further stipulated that the judgment of the executive should be conclusive as to the violation of the conditions of the pardon: Held, that upon the violation of the conditions of the pardon the legal status of the party became the same as it was before the pardon was granted.</p>

Appeal ‘from Polk District Comt. In 1869 the defendant claimed to be the owner of a patent right for an alleged improvement in steam furnaces for fanning the fire, commonly called a blower. At that time, and subsequently, in consideration of the conveyance by the 'plaintiff of certain real estate, and promissory notes given him, the defendant sold and assigned said patent for certain specified territory to the plaintiff.

<p> Appeal from Emmet District Cowrt. </p> <p>Proceeding by motion to restore a record of a judgment against defendants and in plaintiffs’ favor, which had been destroyed by fire. The'motion was sustained, and the costs, except those made in resistance of the motion, were taxed to the plaintiffs. From the order taxing the costs to them, the plaintiffs appeal; from the order restoring the judgment, the defendants appeal.</p>

In 1865 the plaintiff Maria L. Burns purchased of the defendant eighty acres of land for a consideration of $400, and received defendant’s .conveyance therefor. Said conveyance contained a covenant to warrant and defend the title to said premises against all persons. The defendant had not then and never since has had any right or title to said land.

<p> Appeal from Montyomery District Court. </p> <p>The facts are stated in tlie opinion.</p>

for the delinquent taxes of 1871, and that the defendant makes some claim to-the real estate in question adverse to the title of plaintiffs.

This is a proceeding by certiorari for a review of tlie action of the board of supervisors of Poweshiek county, in refusing to submit to the legal voters of said county the question of a relocation of the county seat of said county at Malcolm. The writ of certiorari was issued, as prayed, to which the defendants made return and answer. The plaintiff filed a reply. The court submitted a finding of facts and conclusions of law, and reversed the action of the board.

The plaintiff’s child, two years and one month old, was run over and injured by a train on the defendant’s road, and this action 'is brought to recover for loss of service and expenses incurred in taking care of and nursing said child. There was a jury trial, verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

The facts of the ease upon which the decision is based are stated in the opinion. There was a judgment for plaintiff in the court below. Defendant appeals.

This is an action in equity to set aside and declare void, upon the ground of fraud, a certain conveyance, by warranty deed, of eighty acres of land in Plymouth county, Iowa, made by defendant Aherin and wife to defendant McGann, on October 9, 1875, and to subject said land to the lien of an attachment sued out of the District Court of Plymouth county, in- an action wherein Kellogg & Harris were plaintiffs and the above named Daniel Aherin was defendant; said suit in…

The plamtiff was marshal of the city of Des Moines from the 1st day of April, 1876, until the commencement of this action. As such marshal he made arrests, served processes, and did other acts incumbent upon him as duties pertaining to his office in cases wherein the State of Iowa was plamtiff. This action is brought to recover of Polk county for fees in such cases.

Avjieal from Marshall District Court. Action for damages for breach of an alleged oral contract. The defendant denies the contract. The contract, if any, was made between the defendant and one Weeks. Weeks assigned his claim for damages to the plaintiff, York.

On the 9th day of October, 1872, the plaintiff purchased a certain tract of land at tax sale for the delinquent taxes for the year 1871. The land was redeemed from the sale by Julius A. Kuek, on the 6th day of October, 1874. This action was brought against the defendant, who is treasurer of Warren county, to set aside the redemption which it is alleged was improperly made, and to compel the defendant to make a tax deed to plaintiff for said land.

The abstract presents the facts of the case in tbe following language: “At the term of the District Court of said county, in November, 1877, there was pending the ease of the State of Iowa v. Wm. é S. E. Neioton, on indictment charging said defendants with the crime of keeping a nuisance; that the name of appellee herein was on the back of said indictment, indorsed as a witness before the grand jury, and was the only name so indorsed, and the only witness the State had ;…

This was an action to foreclose a mortgage. A decree was rendered for' plaintiff, under which the lands were sold upon execution to plaintiff. Held: and so decreed, that it had the right, as a junior mortgagee, to redeem the lands sold within a time prescribed.

The Des Moines Water Company was incorporated in 1871. The general nature of its business, as set forth in the articles of incorporation, is “the construction of water works, and the operation and use of the same, for the purpose of supplying the city of Des Moines and its citizens with water. * * * ” By 'an ordinance of the city council the water company was empowered to build, maintain and operate water works in said city, to supply said city and its inhabitants with pure…

The petition in this case was filed on the 8th day of December, 1875. Service of the original notice was made upon the defendant in Polk county; on the day following, requiring him to appear and defend before noon of the first day of the next February Term of said court. The action was in equity to quiet plaintiff’s alleged title to certain real estate. The defendant did not appear on the first day of the term.

The plaintiff instituted an action at law against H. W. Wilson, and caused an attachment to issue therein, and process of garnishment to be served upon defendant, Wasson. The foundation of the action against Wilson was a promissory note given plaintiff for money borrowed and an account for an over-draft.

Action upon a bail bond whereby defendant 'was bound as surety for the appearance of one Crow before the District Court, who was held to answer a charge of felony by a justice of the peace. A default was entered by the District Court and the bail was declared forfeited. The answer alleges that Crow did appear, and, after indictment, was arrested upon a warrant issued by order of the District Court, and was thereafter permitted to escape by the sheriff.

Action upon account against a husband and wife for family expenses. The-indebtedness'was contracted by the husband, the defendant James Glass, in 1871. Afterward he was discharged in bankruptcy. The court rendered judgment against the wife, the defendant Louisa Glass, and she now appeals.

A judgment was rendered by a justice of the peace of Palo Alto county against the plaintiff, in favor of the defendant ^Hall. A transcript of said judgment was filed in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court of Palo Alto county, and judgment entered thereon in said Circuit Court. An execution was thereon issued directed to the sheriff of Emmet county, and a transcript of the judgment filed in the proper clerk’s office in the last named county.

Action on account for legal services. One item of charge is five hundred dollars for services in a divorce suit. The plaintiff testified that while the case was pending, and when about two-thirds of the work was done, he desired to be relieved from the case, and that he told the defendant that he would be-relieved unless he had a contract for more than an ordinary fee. He testified that at first the defendant refused to give it, but afterward agreed to.

<p>1. Appeal: when'it lies. An appeal lies from an order of the court overruling a demurrer when such ruling involves the merits of the case, and the party at the time elects to stand upon his. demurrer.</p> <p>2. Attorney : leen oe : waiver. Where'an attorney obtained judgment in f^yor of his client, and filed a claim for a lien thereon, and afterward procured the satisfaction of the judgment by perfecting the client’s title to land attached in the action, held, that, whatever lien he might have beers entitled to upon the land attached, in the hands of the adverse party, it) was waived when he procured satisfaction of the judgment, and the transfer of the title to his client.</p>

■ Action in chancery to quiet the title in plaintiff of three lots in Tama City. The answer sets up that the fee simple title to the property is in the defendant, and shows that the plaintiff claims title under tax deeds which are alleged to be void, and that, defendant is entitled to redeem from the tax sale upon which the deeds were executed, and prays that defendant may be permitted to redeem from the tax sales.

<p> Appeal from PottatuaUmiie Circuit Cowt. </p> <p>Action at law. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.</p>

Action to set aside foreclosure sale. The plaintiffs are heirs of one James McMannis, deceased. The mortgaged land belonged to his estate. At the date of the mortgage, March 29, 1873, the plaintiffs, George W. McMannis, James McMannis and John McMannis, were minors. Catherine McMannis, the widow of the decedent and mother of the minors, was their guardian. As such guardian she borrowed money of the defendant for the support and education of her wards.

J. C. F. Vance is a minor. This action was brought by-Samuel Vance, his next friend. Recovery was sought of defendant for an alleged malicious prosecution, and for slanderous words spoken of said J. 0. F. Vance. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for the defendant. The court rendered judgment against Samuel Vance, as next friend, for the costs of the action. Exceptions were entered to the judgment, and an appeal therefrom was taken.

Plaintiff sued the defendant before a justice of the peace for breach of warranty on three farming implements, claiming twenty-five dollars damages on one and eight dollars damages on each of the others. He also claimed fifty cents for dray-age. The answer was a general denial. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for twelve dollars.

F. C. Wood was the owner of a homestead in Boone county, in this State. She died in January, 1872, and by her will devised all her property to her three children. She owed debts contracted in New York before she acquired the homestead. In July, 1872, George Wood, one of the children, and a devisee under the will, made a mortgage upon an undivided one-third of the homestead. Appellants are the owners of said mortgage.

The defendants were tried upon an indictment of which the fpllowing is a copy: “The grand jury * * * * * * accuse Williami 'Eidley and C. M. Johnson of the crime of burglary committed' as follows : The said William Eidley and C. M. Johnson, on; 'the 2nd day of August, 1876, in the county of Polk, in the; night-time of said day, unlawfully, feloniously and bhrglari-l ously, did break and enter the store of one John Slatten, there' situated, in which said store, goods,…

The defendant pleaded in his original answer a want of consíderatioñ. He averred that the note was given in pursuance of a contract whereby ■ the plaintiff sold, and agreed to convey by deed of warranty, to the Buffalo Creek Oil Company, of which defendant was a member, a certain tract of land in the State of Pennsylvania; and he further averred that the plaintiff never executed the deed, and never had any title. There was a trial by jury, ■ and verdict for the defendant.

<p> Appeal from Polk District Gowrt. </p> <p>The defendant was indicted for the embezzlement of two hundred and seventy-eight dollars, in money, belonging to one Bowman. Upon a trial he was convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary for one year. Defendant appeals.</p>

” The capital stock was fixed at three hundred thousand dollars, and the shares were two hundred dollars each; the same was to be paid at the rate of one dollar per share each month. It was provided in the articles of incorporation that certain fines might be imposed for non-payment of monthly dues, and dereliction of duties on the part of officers.

An action in equity, to enforce tlie specific performance of two contracts to convey land. There was a decree, after a trial upon the merits, dismissing plaintiffs’ petition, from which they appeal.

On the 20th day of January, 1870, Wm. Eelt, one of the defendants, conveyed by -warranty deed to E. J. Turnure, his co-defendant, the south-east quarter of section nineteen, township ninety-seven, range nineteen, Cerro Gordo county. In 1873 plaintiff, under a contract, furnished Wm. Eelt money end property to the amount of about six hundred dollars. Other sums were advanced by him during the same year.

The defendant was convicted of the crime of burglariously entering a dwelling-house in the night-time with intent to steal, and now appeals to this court.

Action at law to recover compensation for services as-jailer, rendered by plaintiff. There was a judgment for the defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

On the 2d day of November, 1875, the plaintiffs filed in the Black Hawk Circuit Court a petition claiming of the defendants, McCormick, Hall & Porter, the sum of four hundred and twelve dollars and sixty cents, on account of building material furnished for the erection of a school-house for the independent district of East Waterloo, and asking the enforcement of a mechanic’s lien upon said budding therefor.

At the December Term, 1873, oí the Delaware District Court, a decree was entered in this cause for defendant. On the 23d of December, 1875, the plaintiff perfected an appeal from the decree to this court.

Appeal from Clinton Circuit Cow't. This is a proceeding upon petition for a new trial. A demurrer to the petition was sustained, and plaintiff appeals.

In March, 1813, the plaintiff was the owner of a farm of one hundred and sixty acres in Cedar county. A verbal contract was entered into between plaintiff and defendant by which defendant agreed to exchange for said farm one hundred and eighty acres of land in Hancock county, and pay to plaintiff two thousand dollars in four equal annual payments. Plaintiff surrendered possession of his farm to the defendant.

Action to set aside a conveyance of real estate, as having been made to defraud creditors. The plaintiff holds a judgment against the defendant Sewell Worthley for seven hundred and fifty-two dollars. The land in question is eighty acres in Cherokee county, standing in the name of the defendant Eleanor Worthley, wife of Sewell Worthley.

Action on a promissory note executed in consideration of the sale of a “harvester,” a lien on which was reserved or stipulated in the note. The defense pleaded was a former adjudication. A demurrer thereto having been sustained, the defendants appeal.

This is an action in equity for the abatement, as nuisances, of two dams, erected by the Burlington & Missouri River Railroad Company, upon a stream of water called North Avery, which flows across a corner of plaintiff’s premises, and for two hundred dollars damages for injuries occasioned by said dams. The cause was tried by the court upon depositions, and is triable here de novo. The court below dismissed the petition, and rendered judgment against plaintiff for costs.

Action to recover damages sustained on account of a road having been located upon lands conveyed by defendant, to plaintiff by deed of warranty. There was a trial to the court without a jury, and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Charles W. Gibbs was the owner of one hundred and sixty acres of land in Dallas county. His title dated from October 1, 1855. The taxes on said land were delinquent for the years 1857, 1858, and 1859, and at the tax sale for 1861 the same was sold for said delinquent taxes. On the 19th day of December, 1866, the treasurer executed a tax deed in pursuance of the sale. Appellants claim title under said tax deed.

The indictment charges that the defendant, being the mortgagor of certain personal property, and the said mortgage being unpaid, did, at the county of Plymouth, wilfully and feloneously conceal, sell and dispose of said property without the consent of the mortgagee. The defendant, having been found guilty and sentenced, as provided by law, appeals.

<p> Appeal from Clarke District Comi. </p> <p>The defendant was indicted, at the May term of the Clarke District Court, for murder in the first degree. At the same' term he was tried, convicted of murder in the second degree,] and sentenced to the penitentiary for twenty years. He appeals.</p>

The plaintiffs’ action is based on an accepted draft and account. They caused an attachment to issue on the ground' that defendants were about to dispose of their property with intent to defraud their creditors. A stock of merchandise was seized under the writ of attachment.

The averments of the petition in this action, so far as necessary to an understanding of the questions involved, are-in substance as follows: The plaintiff, a railway corporation, was organized in June, 1876, and owns and operates a railroad from Burlington, Iowa, northwardly through Benton county, to the Iowa State line.

On the 16th day of July, 1874, the plaintiffs and defendants entered into a written contract, by which plaintiffs agreed to erect for the defendants a block of brick buildings, according to certain written plans and specifications. 'The defendants were to furnish all the building materials. Eor the labor and mechanical skill in erecting said buildings plaintiffs were to receive a certain compensation, which was, as to amount and times of payment, set forth in the contract.

Action in chancery to quiet the title of certain lands in plaintiff. There was' a decree dismissing his bill, from which he appeals. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

The treasury of the defendant was robbed, and, as plaintiff claims, a reward was offered by the defendant for the arrest and conviction of the thieves, and an additional amount for the recovery of the money stolen. A demurrer to the petition having been sustained, the plaintiff appeals.

The petition of plaintiff alleges that her husband, D. C. Whitehead, died seized of certain described real estate; that •out of said premises plaintiff selected and caused to be surveyed and platted her homestead. Plaintiff claims a homestead interést for herself and family in the real estate so .selected, and her dower interest in the remainder of the •estate of her late husband.

The petition contains three counts: “1. Charging that the defendants unlawfully and with force entered the premises of plaintiff, with a large number of cattle, and trod down, ate up and destroyed the grass, fruit trees, and shrubbery there growing, and injured and destroyed the buildings and improvements thereon. “2.

The plaintiff was formerly sheriff of Pottawattamie county, and, as such officer, served notices and performed other services in cases pending in the District and Circuit Courts for persons for whom the defendant was acting as attorney.

The defendant, Wirtner, filed in the office of the county auditor a petition asking for a change in a highway. The plaintiff, Spurrier, filed a remonstrance, with a claim for damages. Upon a hearing before the board of supervisors, the •prayer of the petition was granted, upon the payment of the damages claimed to have been sustained by Spurrier, and .assessed at one hundred and seventy-five dollars and costs.

The plaintiff claims of the defendant the amount of a draft which the defendant accepted.

The defendant was indicted for threatening verbally to kill Zenana Staats and F. S. Wood, with the intention of thereby causing them to leave their home against their will. Upon a trial he was convicted, and fined in the sum of ten dollars. He now appeals to this court.

Appeal from Winneshiek District Court, Action at law upon a promissory note executed by a firm, of which defendants were copartners. There was a judgment for plaintiff. Defendant Green appeals.

Action to set aside a conveyance made by the defendant Joseph Willis to his co-defendants Benjamin Lake and A. L. Ankeny, of certain land in the city of Clinton. The land formerly belonged to one Eunice N. Gray, how deceased. During her life-time she executed a deed to the plaintiff, and he claims' to be the owner of the same under such deed.

The plaintiff avers that the defendant erroneously and illegally exacted from him the payment of certain taxes, and he brings this action to recover from the county the amount thus paid. The plaintiff. is the owner of a certain lot in the city of Ottumwa, in Wapello county, upon which he erected a block of buildings, commencing in August, 1875, and completing it in March, 1876. The lot was duly assessed in January, 1875.

Action to recover possession of a threshing machine, on the ground that plaintiff was the owner thereof. The answer denied the several allegations in the petition, and by way of counterclaim alleged the defendant had been damaged in the sum of seven hundred dollars by reason of the suing “out of a writ of replevin against this defendant, and causing the same to be levied” on said machine.

It is averred in the petition that, in the year 1855, the defendant, a resident of Illinois, came to Adams county, in this State, the plaintiff’s place of residence, and employed plaintiff to survey vacant lands and furnish numbers of lands, for-the purpose of entry at the land office, for the agreed price of five dollars per quarter-section; that plaintiff furnished to defendant the numbers of thirteen quarter-sections, and surveyed the same, for which defendant was to pay…

<p> Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. </p> <p>R. J. Hardesty, deceased, was the owner of eighty acres of land, upon which he resided as his home. Esther A. E. Hardesty is his widow, and, since the death of her husband, she has continued to reside upon and occupy the homestead. Prior to the death of her husband, he and his said wife executed a mortgage upon all of said land, for the sum of seven hundred dollars, and interest.</p> <p>Plaintiff, as executor of the estate of R. J. Hardesty, commenced this proceeding to sell the real estate of the deceased, to pay debts, and asked that the widow be compelled to elect whether she will take her rights under the law or under the will of the decedent, and that, after such election, her interest in such real estate be set apart to her, and the residue be ordered to be sold to pay the debts. Esther A. E. Hardesty appeared to plaintiff’s petition, and elected to take her share as widow under the law, instead of under the will.</p> <p>The court found that she was “entitled to have the undivided one-third of said real estate set apart to her, including the homestead, subject to the pro rata incumbrance of the seven hundred dollar mortgage, being the one-third of said mortgage, and that the administrator is entitled to sell the remainder of said real estate, incumbered with the two-thirds of said seven hundred dollar mortgage..”</p> <p>From this order Esther A. E. Hardesty appeals.</p>

This action was commenced by the Joliet Iron and Steel Company against the corporation defendant in November, 1875, to enforce an alleged lien. E. H. Thayer was appointed receiver of the company.

This cause has already been before this court. See 46' Iowa, 150. Upon the former appeal there was a trial de novo. The main question was as to the validity of a certain tax title held by the plaintiff. Said title was held invalid by the court below, and upon that issue the decree was affirmed.

The original notice in this action, which was duly served,., recites that the petition would be on file November the 20th % it was filed November the 22d. The defendants moved to-.' dismiss the petition, for the reason that it was filed after thei time specified in the notice. The motion was overruled, and' judgment was rendered against defendants. Erom this ruling and judgment defendants appeal.

Appeal,from Lee District Corn't. The defendant was indicted for the murder of Michael McNamara. He was found guilty of murder in the first degree, and by the judgment of the court was sentenced to ihe penitentiary for life, from which judgment he appeals. The facts necessary to an understanding of the questions made appear in the opinion.

For a history of this case, prior to the commencement of the present proceeding, reference is made to a former appeal. See Stinson v. Richardson et al., 44 Iowa, 373. On the plaintiff’s appeal the decree was modified. The procedendo was filed in the Circuit Court February 14,1877.

This is an action in equity for the foreclosure of an alleged mortgage. The instrument claimed by plaintiff to be a mortgage was in the form of a warranty deed. Defendants claimed it was in fact a warranty deed, and conveyed the title. There was a decree for the defendants. Plaintiffs appeal.

Action for crim. con. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Both parties appeal. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

The plaintiff claims of the defendants the sum of two hundred and sixty-one dollars and sixty-six cents, alleged to be 'due on two promissory notes executed by the defendants. The defendant J. R. Phillips filed her separate answer, as follows: “Admits that on or about the time alleged by plaintiff defendants made to plaintiff the notes in suit; admits every other material allegation.

On the 14th day of April, 1874, William O’Connell recovered a judgment by default against Garrett Cotter for one hundred and sixty-one dollars and three cents, aiid twenty-one dollars and ninety-five cents costs, and fifty dollars attorney’s fee, together with a foreclosure of mortgage, and an order for a special execution. The petition upon which this judgment was rendered did not pray a foreclosure of the mortgage.

Plaintiffs aver that they are the heirs at law of J. B. Waters, deceased, who departed this life in the month of August, 1885; that the defendant, H. P. Waters, and said J. B. Waters, were each the owners of an undivided half of certain real estate, and that upon the death of said J. B. Waters the plaintiffs became the owner of his interest by inheritance; that the defendant has received the rents and profits of said-real estate.

The petition of plaintiffs alleges that they loaned to defendant S. S. Evans, in 1869, the sum of two thousand eight hundred and fifty-five dollars, for the purpose of enabling him to make alterations and improvem'ents upon his house in Glendale, in Council Bluffs, for which amount he executed to them his note February 25, 1870; that at the time said loan was made Evans told them that after said improvements were made he would thereby be able to effect an exchange of the…

The following indictment was found and duly presented against the defendant: “The jurors of the grand jury of the State of Iowa within and for said county of Allamakee, legally convoked, impaneled, tried, sworn and charged, in the name and by the authority of the State of Iowa, upon their oaths do aver, find and present that Charles Savoye and Conrad Arnold, at and within said county, on or about the 15th day of August, 1875, with force and arms unlawfully, wickedly,…

The defendant and one Charles Savoye were jointly indicted for conspiring together to bring about the seduction of Elizabeth Stielsmith. The indictment is fully set out in' the case of The State v. Savoye, ante, 562. The defendant was convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for three years. He appeals.

The petition shows that the defendant sold or' gave away beer to one Albert Cooper, a minor. The defendant, in his answer, admits that he gave beer to the said Albert Cooper, but says that he did so by the order of his father, John Cooper, upon whose relation this action is instituted. The plaintiff demurred to the defendant’s answer upon the ground that it did not show that the defendant gave the beer upon the written order of the said John Cooper.

Action in chancery. A cross-bill was filed by defendants. Upon a trial on the merits both bill and cross-bill were dismissed, and both plaintiff and defendants appeal.

The plaintiffs claim of defendant the sum of ninety dollars and ninety cents, for an alleged failure of defendant to take and ship for plaintiffs four car loads of hogs. The cause was tried by a jury. Both parties asked for special findings. The plaintiffs moved for judgment on the special findings. The court overruled the motion, and rendered judgment for defendant for costs. The plaintiffs appeal.

The defendant was indicted, tried, convicted and sentenced 'for the crime of seduction, and appeals to this court for a reversal of the judgment against him.

<p>1. Practice in the Supreme Court: exceptions to instructions. When the defendant fails to except to the instructions of the court, relying upon a practice that all instructions given are regarded as excepted to, the practice should be stated in the abstract to be of avail to appellant.</p> <p>2. Evidence : boundary line. In an action involving the determination of the division line between certain city lots where the plaintiff claimed under a conveyance which described the land conveyed by a fixed monument, the testimony of a surveyor who platted the land, as to the location of certain stakes set by him, was properly rejected.</p>

<p> Aityeal from. Mitchell District Court. </p> <p>Indictment for larceny. The defendants, having been convicted, appeal.</p>

The plaintiff is the wife of one William Ward, and claims that she has been injured in person and in her means of support by the intoxication of her husband, produced by intoxicating liquors sold to him by the defendant. Other facts are stated in the opinion. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

The defendant was indicted for larceny. The alleged crime consisted in stealing a set of double harness, of the value of twenty-five dollars, from a building in the night time. There was a verdict of guilty, and the defendant was sentenced to the penitentiary for two years.

The defendant was indicted and convicted of grand larceny, and now appeals to this court. The facts of the case appear in the opinion.

<p> Appeal from Hardin District Gowrt. </p>

On the 20th day of October, 1871, Bond recovered judgment against Epley upon two promissory notes for six thousand three hundred and fifty-two dollars and fifteen cents, and costs, with an order for special execution against attached property, the judgment to draw interest at the rate of eighteen per cent.

These cases grow out of the preceding case of Bond v. Epley. The first of the above cases is a proceeding for an injunction to restrain Bond from enforcing his judgment, recovered in the former case, against certain property attached in that case. The plaintiff alleges that he purchased the property from Epley, and that the judgment is no lien thereon.

This action is brought to establish an unrecorded life lease upon one hundred and twenty acres of land as against a subsequent conveyance. The land was formerly owned by the plaintiff’s wife. He avers that on the 3d day of June, 1868, his wife, Louisa A. Bevier, executed tó him a Efe lease 6f the land. Immediately afterward she executed to the defendant (her and plaintiff’-s son) a deed of the land by way of gift.

This is an action upon a judgment of the Circuit Court of La Salle county, Illinois. It is averred in the petition that the defendant is a non-resident of the State of Iowa. An attachment was issued, the return to which shows that it was levied upon the undivided interest of Maria A. Moore (defendant) in certain real estate. The defendant appeared to the action and moved to discharge the attachment, upon the following grounds: 1.

The plaintiffs claim mechanic’s liens upon the railroad known as the Burlington, Cedar Eapids & Minnesota Bail-way, now the Burlington, Cedar Eapids & Northern Eailwa'y. The cause was submitted to the court upon an agreed statement of facts, substantially as follows: The Burlington, Cedar Eapids & Minnesota Eailway Company was organized in 1868, for the purpose of building a railway fromBurlington, via Cedar Eapids, to the north line of the State.

The plaintiff filed his substituted petition, alleging: “1. That on or about the 14th day of February, 1867, Mathias Ham executed and delivered to Margaret McKenzie his promissory note for the sum of three thousand dollars, and on or about the time aforesaid she sold and transferred the same to said defendant, together with a mortgage given to her to secure the same by said Ham and wife, at the time aforesaid, on the following described property: * * * * “2.

The appellant, E. Gf. Marlow, is the son of John Marlow, deceased, and heir to his estate. William Marlow is the administrator, and has filed his final report. The appellant contests two items in the report. These items, one for six hundred and seventy-five dollars and one for seven hundred and eighty-five dollars, are entered in the report as credits to the administrator for money paid by him on the indebtedness of the estate to one James Marlow.

Holver EL Lea died in tlie year 1868, intestate. The defendant John Thompson was appointed administrator of his estate on the 28th day of February, 1868. On the 11th day of April, 1868, the plaintiff filed with the county judge an account and certain promissory notes, as a claim against the estate of decedent, in accordance with the statute in such cases made and provided.

Action upon a policy of insurance against damage by lightning. The defendant claims that the damage in • question was not caused by lightning, but by a tornado. As to what the cause of the damage was the evidence is such as to leave the question in great doubt. But the company sets up other defenses.

Appeal from Diobuque District Coxt/rt. Indictment for an assault with intent to commit murder. Yerdiet of guilty; judgment, and defendant appeals.

This action was brought to recover damages for injuries reeived by plaintiff while traveling on a highway, by reason of the defendant’s dogs scaring a horse attached to a buggy in which the plaintiff was riding, and the plaintiff, being frightened by the running and kicking of the horse, jumps d from the buggy and was greatly injured.

On the 20th day of November, 1877, the plaintiff filed a petition as follows: “That in the month of October, 1868, the Cedar Falls & Minnesota Bailroad Company was engaged in constructing its railroad through Floyd county, and through Floyd township, in said county, and that, for the purpose of aiding said company in the construction of said road, an election was held in said Floyd township, on or about the 29th day of October, 1868, at which election the proposition was…

In 1871 the defendant was assessor in Bloomfield township, Clinton county, and as such assessed to the plaintiff, a citizen of that township, about nine thousand dollars of property, which the plaintiff avers was about eight thousand five hundred dollars more than he had, and the plaintiff further avers that the wrongful assessment was wilfully and maliciously made by the defendant, and that by reason of the' wrong therein done he was compelled to pay taxes on more property…

The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted for seduction. He was sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for two years, and appeals to this court for a reversal of the judgment against him.

The amount in controversy in this action,, -as shown by the pleadings, is less than one hundred dollars. A demurrer to the answer was sustained. Defendant appeals.

Defendant was convicted of grand larceny and sentenced to confinement in the penitentiary for two years and eight months. He now prosecutes his appeal in this court.

The plaintiff, upon application, caused to be issued from the District Court of Montgomery county a writ of certiorari, directed to the defendants, for the purpose of testing the legality of their proceedings in relation to the alteration of- a public road, to which the defendants made answer and return.

The plaintiff’s petition alleges in the first count that in tlie month of February, 1868, the defendant entered into a ■written contract with one N. E. Snodgrass for the construction of a bridge across the Middle Nodaway river, near Yillisca, for the sum of fourteen hundred and twenty-five dollars; that on the 8th day of April, 1869, said Snodgrass .sold and transferred by writing his interest in said contract to the plaintiff; that about said last named date the defendant…

<p>Practice in the supreme court : waiver oe appeal.</p>

Action for malicious prosecution. The petition states that defendant Imaliciousty, and without reason dale and probable cause therefor, charged Hhe plaintiff with the crime of larceny, and caused him to be taken before iia justice of the peace and tried for said offense; that by reason of false iiand corrupt testimony the justice “bound over” the plaintiff to appear 'before the grand jury, by whom no indictment was found and theproceed'ing dismissed.

<p> Appeals from Emmet Circuit Court. </p>

<p>Practice in the supreme court : bill of exceptions.</p>

The plaintiff claims of the defendant the sum of five thousand dollars, which he alleges to bo due from defendant on a settlement of partnership accounts. The answer is a general denial. There was a jury trial, and a verdict and judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals.

Appeal from Marshall Gwemt Gouri. Action for divorce. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for by plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

<p> Appeal from Butler Bisti'ict Court. </p>

<p> Appeal from, Union District Oowt. </p> <p>Action on a promissory note. Judgment for the plaintiffs, and defendants appeal.</p>

<p> Appeal from, Muscatine District Oow't. </p> <p>Action in equity to set aside a tax deed. Decree for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.</p>

<p>Practice in the supreme court.</p>

Action for an injunction against the defendant as road supervisor, to restrain him from opening a road. The application is based upon allegations that no road has been established, and no right acquired by the public in any way. A temporary injunction was granted, and afterwards, upon motion of the defendant, was dissolved; and afterwards, upon hearing, decree was rendered for defendant. The plaintiff appeals.

<p>Divorce: residence: jurisdiction.</p>

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

Appeal from, Tama Circuit Court. Action to recover possession of a horse. Trial to the court, judgment for the defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

In 1871 Jeffries, in consideration of “one thousand five hundred dollars in hand paid by Charles H. Hummel and Henry P. Niles, conveyed unto said Hummel & Niles lo'ts numbers uine and ten, in block number-one,” in Council Bluff's. The said Hummel and Niles were at that time partners doing- business under the name and style of Hummel & Niles.

This is an action in equity to set aside the defendants’ tax title to a certain described eighty acres of land. One of the grounds upon which the relief is asked is that there was an illegal combination at the sale to prevent competition. The court decreed that the treasurer’s deed be set aside, and that the plaintiff’s title be quieted. The defendants appeal.

<p>Practice in the supreme court : assignment of errors.</p>

The petition states that the plaintiffs recovered a judgment against 1. W. Ciesman, which became a lien on certain real estate; that afterward the defendants, in consideration of the conveyance of said real estate to them, agreed and promised in writing to pay said judgment. There was a demurrer to the petition, which, being overruled, the defendants appeal.

The plaintiff sold and the defendant purchased of him certain real estate for the sum of two thousand dollars, of which one thousand dollars was to be paid in money at certain stated periods, and the residue by the conveyance of three hundred and twenty acres of land in Kossuth county, Iowa. The plaintiff claims the conveyance was not made, and this action is brought to recover the one thousand dollars.

Action on a promissory note. There was a counter-claim pleaded in the answer. Trial to the court, judgment on the counter-claim for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

<p> Appeal from Dubuque Circuit Court. </p> <p>The petition contains two counts. The first claims to recover on a promissory note alleged to have been executed by the defendant, and the second is for money “ hacl and received ” of the plaintiff.</p> <p>The material allegations of the petition were denied by the answer. Trial to the court and judgment for the plaintiff on the second count of the petition. The defendant appeals.</p>

Action to redeem from tax sales two lots in Tama City. The petition sets up that the fee simple title to the property is in the plaintiff, and that the defendant claims title under tax deeds which are alleged to be void, and that the plaintiff is entitled to redeem from the tax sales upon which the deeds were executed, and prays that the plaintiff may be permitted to redeem from the tax sales. There was a decree for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

The defendant Eagan obtained a judgment against John McCaffrey, the plaintiff’s husband, on which an execution was issued, and levied on certain real estate the legal title to which was in the plaintiff. The object of this action was to enjoin the sale thereof, and establish plaintiff’s title five and clear of the lien of said judgment. An injunction was issued.