Volume 51 — Illinois Appellate Court Reports

Memorandum.—Attachment proceedings. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Randolph County; the Hon. Benjamin R. Burroughs, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the February term, 1893. Statement oe th® Case.

Memorandum.—Proceedings under the insolvency act. Error to the Circuit Court of St. Clair County; the Hon. Alonzo S.Wilderman, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the February term, A. D. 1893. Statement of the Case. The People’s Bank of Belleville, Ill., of which appellees were stockholders, failed and made an assignment under the statute, April 22, 1878.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Samuel P. McConnell, Judge, presiding. Declaration on a certificate of insurance; plea, general issue; trial by jury; verdict for plaintiff; motion for a new trial granted; cause then submitted to the court upon an agreed statement of facts; finding for defendant; appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and reversed. Judgment entered in the Appellate Court.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas Gr. Windes, Judge, presiding. Trial by the court; finding and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893.

Memorandum.—Criminal law. In the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Kirk Hawes, Judge, presiding. Proceedings for contempt of court. Two cases. Writ of error and appeal. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and reversed.

memorandum.—In chancery. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Oliver H. Horton, Judge, presiding. Appeal from a decree sustaining a demurrer to petition for a mechanics’ lien and dismissing the same for want of equity. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893.

Memorandum.—Mechanics’ liens. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Petition fox-lien; answer; hearing upon demurrer; petition dismissed; appeal by petitioner. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Chancery. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Lord? C. Collins, Jr,, Judge, presiding. Bill for injunction; dismissed for want of equity; appeal by complainants. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement op the Case. This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Cook County, dismissing appellant’s bill of complaint for want of equity.

<p>Memorandum.—Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.-—Assumpsit. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Declaration, first indorsee against maker; plea, general issue; trial by jury; judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorandum.—Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Oliver H. Horton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893.</p>

<p>1. Forcible Detainer—Appeal Bond in Five Days.—In forcible detainer cases the bond on appeal must be filed within five days after the rendition of the judgment.</p> <p>2. Ajbstract and Briefs—Failure to File in Time—Motion to Dismiss.—A failure to file briefs and abstracta in time under the rule entitles the appellee to have the appeal dismissed, unless the delay is excused upon circumstances to be shown to the court.</p>

Memorandum.—Appeal from justice’s court. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Trial by jury; verdict and judgment for defendant. Appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action on a mutual benefit certificate. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Charles R. Starr, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Bill for specific performance. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Oliver H. Horton, Judge, presiding. Bill dismissed for want of equity; complainant brings error. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Appeal from justice’s court. In the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge,presiding. Trial by jury; verdict and judgment for defendant; appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum,—Chancery proceedings. In the Circuit Court of Cook County. Proceedings for contempt of court; judgment of conviction; writ of error by the defendant. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case. Plaintiff in error having failed in business in the fall of 1891, a creditor’s bill was filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County by Aaron Feltenstein upon a judgment recovered by him.

<p>Memorandum.—Criminal law. Appeal from the Criminal Court of Cook County; the Hon. Bichard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March 'term, 1893, and reversed.</p>

Memorandum.—Assignment. In the County Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Scales, Judge, presiding. Appeal from an order directing priority of payments. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorandum.—Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries'. In the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Declaration in case; plea, not guilty; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the March term, A. D. 1893; reversed and remanded.

Memorandum.—Case. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Declaration for personal injuries; plea of not guilty; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the March term, A. D. 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Divorce. In the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding. Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court dismissing the bill. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893.

Memorandum.—In chancery. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Lorin C. Collins, Judge, presiding. Bill for injunction. Appeal from an order granting the same. Heard in this court at the March term, A. D. 1893, and reversed.

<p>1. Forfeiture—In Courts of Equity.—It is undoubtedly a rule with courts of equity not to enforce either a penalty or a forfeiture.</p> <p>2. Taxes—Presumption of .Payment by Owner.—Where it appears by an abstract of title, that for more than forty years lands have not been sold or forfeited for taxes, save for those of two years, and that during this period there has been but one record title to such lands, and no title adverse known to have been held or asserted, a fah- presumption arises that the taxes upon such premises have, during such term, been paid by those claiming under such record title.</p> <p>3. Conveyances—Ancient Deeds.—Deeds of conveyance forty years old, are entitled to be considered as ancient documents, of the execution of which no further proof is required.</p> <p>4. Ancient Documents—Proof.—It is enough to entitle a. document to be admitted in evidence to show that it bears upon its face marks of having been executed at least thirty years before, and that it comes from the custodians who would have possession of it if it were genuine. Such a document proves itself.</p> <p>5. Deeds—Proof of Ancient Deeds.—To entitle a deed to be admitted, some evidence in addition to proof of antiquity is required. Where possession has accompanied it, that of itself furnishes sufficient evidence of its authenticity to entitle it to be read without further proof, if it be more than thirty years old; possession is not, however, essential to admissibility; other things equivalent to it, or explanatory matter clearly indicating ownership may justify its admission.</p> <p>6. Abstract—Title Free from Reasonable Doubt.—Where an abstract of title showed several deeds for more than forty years recorded in the proper office, and numerous recorded transactions of large importance running through a period of many years under them, the taxes having apparently been paid by the claimants thereunder, and no hostile title being shown to have ever existed or been asserted, it was held, that so far as these deeds were concerned the abstract showed a title free from reasonable doubt.</p> <p>7. Contract—Waiver of Provisions by an Attorney.—An attorney, as such, has no power to waive the requirements of a contract and make a new bargain for his client; so held where a contract required the furnishing of an abstract showing a title free from material defects, and a conveyance of a good title, free from reasonable doubts.</p> <p>8. Tender of a Deed—When Unnecessary.—Where a vendee objects to the title, a tender of a deed, which he declares he will not accept, is unnecessary.</p> <p>9. Interpleader—Effect on the Original Parties.—When an inter-pleader is awarded, the original complainant is out of the case, and the defendants should make their claims against each other by such allegations and offers as if they were original litigants.</p> <p>10. Abstract—Objection to Must Be Made in Apt Time.—An objection that an abstract of title is not such a one as a party is bound to furnish should be made within a brief time after the same is submitted for examination.</p>

Memorandum.—-Assumpsit. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Declaration, common counts; pleas of general issue and tender; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. In the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Declaration to recover alleged over-charges exacted on freight; plea of non-assumpsit; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the March term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case.

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and reversed.</p>

Memorandum.—Bill to construe a will. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case.

<p>1. Pleas—-Jmposmp Terms on Withdrawal.—Where a defendant asks leave to withdraw a plea, it is error for the court in granting it to impose conditions.</p> <p>3. Joint Liability—Plea Denying.—The effect of Sec. 36, Chap. 110 R. S., entitled Practice, providing that in actions upon contracts expressed or implied against two or more defendants, as partners or joint obligors or payors, proof of the joint liability or partnership of the defendants, or their Christian or surnames, shall not, in the first instance, be required to entitle the plaintiff to judgment, unless such proof shall be rendered necessary by pleading in abatement, or unless the defendant shall file a plea in bar denying the partnership or joint liability, or the execution of the instrument sued upon, verified by affidavit, is to relieve the plaintiff from proving joint liability if the defendant fails to file a proper plea of denial and fails to show that he is not jointly liable. It is in “ the first instance" that the plaintiff is not required to make proof of "joint liability.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Proceedings under the act concerning assignments for the benefit of creditors. Appeal from the County Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Scales, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brentano, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case. On the first day of September, 1890, appellee and appellants entered into a written agreement, whereby appellee agreed to sell to appellants certain premises situated in the county of Cook and State of Illinois, containing fourteen and sixty-eight hundredths acres, more or less.

<p>1. Counties—Audit of Bills, etc.—Where goods are furnished to a county, bills therefor presented according to law to the county board, and appropriate committees report that, having had the .bills under advisement, they recommend the payment of them, and thereupon the county board, in regular session, adopt such reporte and order the bills paid, it was held, with such orders of the board, no independent proof of the delivery of the goods or of the quantities or prices was necessary. The orders have all the effect of an account stated between individuals.</p> <p>2. Counties—Audit of Bills—What Conclusive of.—An audit of a bill by a county, when the auditors are not fraudulentlyimposed on and act within their jurisdiction, is undoubtedly conclusive, until in some way reversed, as to the liability of the county for the amount audited. But it is conclusive for nothing more, and this is true of every audit made by county supervisors and town boards of auditors. When the auditors honestly allow a claim, acting within their jurisdiction, and no fraud has been practiced upon them in procuring the allowance, the liability of the municipality is fixed, and the claim is no longer subject to dispute.</p> <p>8. Counties—Bower to Bescind Acts of Auditing Committee.—Where a bill for goods furnished has been audited by a municipal corporation it has no power to rescind the audit at a subsequent meeting. Perhaps by virtue of a rule providing that such an action of the board at one meeting might be reconsidered at the next, the board might rescind the audit at the next meeting; but an attempted rescission after the lapse of many months, during which meetings were held every week, is ineffectual.</p> <p>4. Fraud—Finding of Trial Court, When Conclusive.—The finding of the court, trying the cause without a jury, concludes the Appellate Court upon the question of fraud.</p> <p>5. Limitations—County Orders. —The action of the hoard ordering the payment of certain bills was more than five years before the commencement of a suit. It was held that if the plaintiff had any case, it was upon the orders for the payment of his bills, these matters all being in writing, and if there is any evidence of indebtedness it is in writing, to which ten years is the limitation under Sec. 16, Ch. 83, R. S.</p>

<p>1. Building Contracts—Architect as Arbitrator.—In building contracts, where the architect is made an arbitrator in cases of dispute between the owner and contractor, and that his decision shall be final and binding upon all parties, it was held that as such arbitrator he has, as a general rule, power to construe the contract.</p>

Memorandum.—Action on an insurance policy. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the- Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Declaration on policy; pleas, the general issue and a special plea, alleging that the appellee is the son and beneficiary of the insured, Carl Holtz, and that on December 15, 1800, the appellee killed and murdered the insured, by rea. son of which he forfeited and lost all rights as a beneficiary under the beneficiary certificate.

<p>1. Verdict and Judgment—Conclusion of Law, etc.—1The verdict and judgment are merely the conclusion of the law from the proven facts.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. F.RANK Baker, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement oe the Case.

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1898, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Action for damages resulting by reason of a death from negligent acts. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.

<p>1. Arrest—In Civil Case.—In order to justify a resort to arrest, all the provisions of law relating thereto must be fully complied with.</p> <p>3. Arrest—Refusal to Surrender Estate.—Where the issue is upon the alleged refusal of the debtor to surrender his estate, the court may look to the proceedings by which the debtor was called upon- to so surrender.</p> <p>3. Arrest—Capias ad Satisfaciendum Not a Writ of Right.—The law does not make the issuing of a writ of capias ad satisfaciendum a right depending upon the will and action of the execution plaintiff; on the contrary, it contemplates that the sheriff and some judicial officer shall each be in some manner responsible for the existence of such writ.</p> <p>4. Arrest—Body Execution—Sheriff's Return on Properly Execution.—Under Sec. 63 of Chap. 77, E. S. Ill., providing that “if upon the return of an execution unsatisfied in whole or in part, the judgment creditor, or his agent or attorney, shall make an affidavit,” etc., a writ of capais ad satisfaciendum may issue. The sheriff’s return must be made upon his own responsibility, and not because of an order of the plaintiff.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit for goods sold. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County: the Hon. Francis Adams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorandum.—Bill for injunction. Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Kirk Hawes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.— Assumpsit for work, labor, etc. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.

Memorandum.—Trespass to personal property. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and reversed.

Memorandum.—Proceedings under the act pertaining to voluntary assignments. Appeal from the County Court of Cook County; the Hon. George W. Brown, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>1. Lease—Assignment—Transfer of an Equitable Right to Rent.— An assignment and delivery of a lease to a party transfers to him the equitable right to the rent.</p> <p>2. Garnishment—Rent to Accrue—Equitable Assignment.—Where an assignment of a lease by the lessor is made before the rent becomes due, it will take effect as to such rent when it does accrue, and garnishee proceedings against the tenant, served previous to the assignment, will not affect it.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Francis Adams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893. Statement of the Case by the Court. In April, 1890, appellant being the owner of five houses in Chicago, placed them with appellees for sale: One house at $11,500, the others at $12,000 each. Appellees showed one house to a Hr. W. P. Johnson. Hr.

<p>1. Negligence—Ordinary Care.—A person not in the exercise of ordinary care can not recover for personal injuries.</p>

Memorandum.—Bill for a receiver by a stockholder of an insolvent corporation. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action on a policy of insurance. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. James Goggin, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>1. Appeals—In Gases Under the Assignment Act.—An appeal does not lie to the Circuit Court from an order made by the county in a proceeding under the act relating to voluntary assignments.</p>

<p>1. Contracts—Identification of Things Referred to by Parol Evidence.—When the identity of a thing referred to in a written contract is left uncertain, it is proper to hear parol evidence to determine-which of two or more things answering the description, was meant by the parties.</p>

<p>1. Decrees—Presumably Oorreet.—A decree of a court is presumably correct until the contrary is established.</p> <p>2. Divorce—Upheld by Estoppel.—A divorce absolutely void may be upheld by estoppel. An estoppel in pais is to prevent injustice; and no greater injustice could be perpetrated under color of law, than to hold that a woman who has in good faith procured a divorce and married again, is still the wife of the former husband.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas G-. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

<p>1. Evidence—Irrelevant, Properly Excluded.—Evidence having no apparent relevancy to the matter in controversy is properly excluded where there is no statement as to what the party offering it expects to prove.</p>

Memorandum.—Assignment for the benefit of creditors. Appeal from the Comity Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Scales, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>1. Tenancies—From Month to Month—Implication from, Payment of Rent.—From the occupation and payment of monthly rent the law creates a tenancy from month to month.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. James Goggin, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at. the October term, 1893, and affirmed in part.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Declaration on the common counts; motion to exclude plaintiff’s testimony sustained; plaintiff appeals. Heard in this court at the Qctober term, 1893.

<p>1. Garnishment—The Term Defined,—A garnishment is an attachment of the effects of the debtor in the hands of the garnishee, creating no lien upon anything, but holding the garnishee to a personal liability.</p> <p>2. Garnishment—Affected by Assignments.—As between the parties, an assignment, without notice by the assignee to the holder of the fund, takes effect and has precedence of subsequent garnishments against the assignor.</p> <p>3. Garnishment—Affected by Assignment of the Fund—Illustration.—Under the following assignment—“ For value received, I, John Q. Savage, do hereby assign, transfer and set over to William M. Gregg of Chicago, Illinois, and to his heirs and assigns, all my interest in certain claims and demands in favor of George W. Savage against the First National Bank of Monmouth, Illinois, for the recovery of which suit has been brought in the name of said George W. Savage for my use in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. My interest aforesaid hereby assigned is more particularly specified in a certain writing executed by said George W. Savage and myself, whereby Dent, Black & Cratty Bros, were retained to conduct legal proceedings to recover the moneys due said George W. Savage, and the said Dent, Black & Cratty Bros, are hereby requested to recognize said William M. Gregg as my assignee, and to give full effect hereto in his behalf, placing him in my stead as to any moneys which may under said agreement become due to meat any time hereafter”—it was held that Messrs. Dent, Black & Cratty Bros, were not liable as garnishees.</p>

Memorandum.—In chancery. In the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding. Bill to remove cloud, etc.; decree of dismissal for want of equity; appeal by complainants. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>1. Exceptions—When To Be Taken.—Where no exception is taken to the action of the court in directing the jury to find for the plaintiff, however improper such action may have been, the appellant can not first raise the question in this court.</p> <p>2. Record—Stipulation as to Bill of Exceptions.—Where, in a stipulation between the counsel for the parties, entitled in the cause in the Circuit Court, it was agreed “ that the original bill of exceptions may be included and incorporated in the record of this case, without being copied therein,” it was held that it required no stipulation to make the bill of exceptions a part of the record in the Circuit Court; it became such as soon as signed by the judge and filed. It was not a stipulation that the original bill of exceptions, instead of a copy, might be incorporated into the transcript of the record for this court.</p>

Memorandum.—Chancery proceedings. Partnership matters. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County ; the Hon.William G. Ewing, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit on a promissory note. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Foreclosure proceedings. Error to the Superior Court of, Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Oase. This was a bill filed July 30, 1892, to foreclose a trust deed, dated December!, 1890, executed by William 0.

<p>Memorandum.—Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuuey, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and appeal dismissed.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Garnishee proceedings. Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brentano, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.</p>

<p>1. Bills of Exceptions—Objections and Exceptions—Mow Shown. —Where, in a bill of exceptions, at the end of each of the questions were the words, “ Objected to; sustained; exception;” it was held defective, as not showing who objected or what was objected to, or who sustained, or what was sustained. The persons preparing a bill of exceptions must be responsible for all uncertainty and omissions in it.</p> <p>2. Bills of Exceptions—Care in the Preparation.—More care in the preparation of bills of exceptions than merely inserting a transcript of the shorthand notes taken at the trial, is necessary.</p> <p>3. Instructions—Must be in Writing.—Under Sec. 52, Chap. 110, R. S., it is error for the court to instruct the jury orally.</p>

Memorandum.—Action for negligence. In the Circuit Court of Cbok County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Declaration in case; plea of not guilty; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893. Statement of the Case. On the 17th day of August, 1890, William Wrixon, a boy about ten years of age, was a passenger on one of appellant’s cars. The car was proceeding southward on Evanston avenue.

Memorándum.—Application for an order containing an injunction pending an appeal. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and denied.

<p>1. Injunction—Damages on Dissolution.—The question to be determined, is the damage suffered because of the injunction. The necessary and actual cost of removing the same is the real damage. An allowance for attorney’s fees for services in the Appellate Court after the injunction has been terminated by an order of the court below is improper.</p> <p>2. Injunction—Dissolution—Damages—Services of Solicitor.—It is not merely what the services of the solicitor were reasonably worth that is to be found, but for what sum the party has been reasonably and fairly made liable, or what he has reasonably and fairly paid.</p> <p>3. Injunction—Dissolution—Damages—Solicitor's Fees—Agreement. —Where there was an agreement, with an attorney to prepare and argue a motion to dissolve an injunction for the sum of §100, that being the extent of the damage, the defendant can not recover §200, although the attorney’s services might have been worth that sum.</p>

Memorandum.—Forcible detainer. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case.

<p>Memorandum.—Mechanics’ lien proceedings. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.</p>

<p>1. Assignment of Error—Excessive Damages.—The fact that the damages were excessive not having been assigned as one of the causes in a motion for a new trial, it can not be assigned for error. The Appellate Court sits only to review the proceedings of courts, and not in the first instance to correct improper findings of juries; and unless the court was</p> <p>asked to set aside the verdict because of the alleged excessive amount thereof, it could and would not commit any error in not setting it aside for such reason.</p> <p>2. Motion for New Trial—W7iera Abandoned.—When counsel neglect to argue a motion for a new trial, such motion may be considered as abandoned.</p> <p>3. Errors—Assignment Abandoned.—Errors assigned in this court, if not argued, may be treated as abandoned.</p> <p>4. Appellate Proceedings—Errors to be Pointed Out.—The proper-conduct of business, as well as the interests of justice, require that the attention of the trial court should be specifically called to errors it is alleged to have committed, and to all grievances which a party believes he has suffered at its hands.</p>

<p>1. Negligence—Question of Duty.—The law does not require that the drivers of vehicles in the public streets, who may have stopped in their way, must, before starting, take such measures as are reasonably necessary to ascertain whether children have so attached themselves to the vehicles as to be hurt if the vehicles move.</p> <p>2. Appellate Court Practice—Lost Instructions.—The Appellate Court can not pass upon instructions unless all the instructions given upon both sides are shown in the record. Where those of one party are lost, the court will presume that all the law in the refused instructions applicable to the case was in the lost ones.</p>

Memorandum.—Foreclosure proceedings; order as to payment of taxes. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Oliver H. Horton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and reversed with directions.

Memorandum.—Action for damages. Death from negligent act. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case.

Memorandum.—Forcible detainer. In the Superior Court of Cook County, on appeal from a justice; the Hon. Theodore Brentano. Judge, presiding. Appeal by the defendant. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action of debt. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Declaration on a judgment of a sister State; pleas, nul tiel record and special plea denying service of process in the State of Wisconsin; trial by the court; judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorándum.—In chancery. Bill for an accounting. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.

Memorandum.—Assignment for the benefit of creditors. Appeal from an order of the County Court of Cook County, refusing to instruct the assignee to surrender certain property; the Hon. Frank Scales, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1898.

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.</p>

Memorandum.—Debt on penal bond. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Francis Adams, Judge, presiding. Judgment for defendant on demurrer to declaration; appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case. The Chicago City Railway Company was incorporated by a special act of legislature, approved February 14, 1859, entitled “ An act to promote the construction of horse railways in the city of Chicago.” (Pr.

Memorandum.—Bill to restrain the collection of a judgment. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term,. 1898.

<p>1. Bill of Exceptions—Records.—The instructions and motion for anew trial must be incorporated into the bill of exceptions if it is desired to make them a part of the record,</p> <p>2. Record—Not to Be Made by the Clerk.—A clerk can not make that which is not legally a part of the record, so by transcribing it into the record. The trial court makes the record; it is the duty of the clerk merely to transcribe it.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, Reversed and remanded upon condition of the refusal to remit a portion of the judgment.

Memorandum.—Abatement to the service of process. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Francis Adams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed..

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.</p>

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon Francis Adams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Francis Adams, Judge, presiding. Special counts and plea of the general issue; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for defendant; appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brentabo, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

<p>1. Instructions—Must be Based upon the Evidence.—An instruction not predicated upon the evidence in the case, or which misstates the same, is erroneous.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case. Plaintiff in error brought in the Circuit Court an action of assumpsit to recover certain royalties alleged to be due upon a certain contract by it made with the defendant.

<p>1. Parties Litigant—To Sue in Their Right Names.—By whatever name a person may contract, he may, notwithstanding, sue and be sued by his right name.</p> <p>2. Promissory Notes—Control of Indorsements.—The .payee of a promissory note, having the same in his possession, is presumed to be tin-owner of it and has the control over it. He may strike out indorsements upon it.</p> <p>3. Objections to Record—On Rehearing.—Objections to the record can not be made for the first time upon a petition for rehearing.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit for broker’s commissions. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Samuel P. McConnell, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case. In December, 1889, appellant asked appellee, a real estate broker, to sell for him a lot on Ashland boulevard, in the city of Chicago.

Memorandum.—Appeal from an interlocutory order, etc., entered by-the Circuit Comb of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and appeal dismissed.

Memorandum.—Action for damages. Death from negligent act. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1898, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Garnishment. Appeal from an order quashing a writ entered by the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October, term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>1. Injunction— Obstruction of Public Right—Special Injury.—It is only where an obstruction of a public right is such that a special injury has been done, that an individual can maintain an action for a violation of such right. In such case the special injury is the gist of the action.</p> <p>2. Injunctions—Public Injury.—Bills to restrain the doing of that which is merely a public injury and in respect to which the complainant has suffered no wrong or injury not common to the community, must be brought by the attorney-general as the representative of the public.</p> <p>2. Injunctions—Must be Respected.—An injunction, however erroneously issued, must be respected; the fact that it has been granted erroneously, affords no justification or excuse for its violation.</p> <p>4. Court of Chancery—Jurisdiction—How Obtained.—A court of chancery can obtain jurisdiction only by the filing of written pleadings, and the extent of the jurisdiction is determined by the contents of the pleadings.</p> <p>5. Injunctions—Issued Without Jurisdiction.—A- person can not be punished for disobeying an injunction which the court allowing it had no jurisdiction to issue.</p>

Memorandum.—Replevin. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Samuel P. McConnell, Judge, presiding. Declarations for goods wrongfully taken and wrongfully detained, with a count in trover; pleas, general issue, non detinet, property in defendant, and that the plaintiff is a trust in restraint of trade and can not bring suit to carry out the purposes of such trust; verdict for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action for negligence. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Declaration in case; plea of not guilty; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; appeal by defendant. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.

<p>Memorandum.—Condemnation proceedings. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Appeal from the County Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Scales, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and appeal dismissed for insufficiency of the record.

<p>Memorandum.—Order dismissing suit. Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Action for injuries. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon.- Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Declaration in case; plea, not guilty; trial by jury; verdict for plaintiff, $13,500; remittitur $3,500; judgment for $10,000; defendant appeals; heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>1. Bill of Exceptions.—Must Contain the Evidence Relied Upon, —When a bill of exceptions does not show what the testimony of the witnesses excepted to, was, leaving the court uninformed whether the evidence that was heard by the trial court had even a tendency to establish the matters set up by way of defense, it will be presumed that the evidence heard by the trial court, but not shown to the Appellate Court, justified the court in finding the issues for the plaintiff and rendering judgment against the defendant.</p>

<p>1. Verdict—Against the Weight of the Testimony.—A verdict which is manifestly against the weight of the testimony should be set aside; a judgment based upon it will be reversed.</p>

Memorandum.—Chancery. Bill to have an option contract declared a mortgage. Appeal from an order dismissing the bill entered by the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Lorin C. Collins, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorándum.—Bill for an injunction. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Suit against a stockholder. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clieeord, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorándum.—Chancery proceedings. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. ' Declaration in case; plea of not guilty; verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1898.

<p>1. Witnesses—Not to be Insulted on the Stand.—Witnesses should not be insulted when on the stand; nor should their examination be a contest of skill or nerves between a witness and a lawyer.</p> <p>2. Instructions—Respecting Principles of Law.—In instructing the jury it is not the duty of the court to repeat the same principle of law; it is sufficient if it is stated once fairly and intelligibly to the jury.</p> <p>8. Instructions—Referring the Jury to the Declaration.—In giving instructions to the jury, it is absurd to refer them to the declaration as to the issues in a case.</p> <p>4. Instructions—A General Rule.—Instructions should, in a clear, concise and comprehensive manner, inform the jury as to what material facts must be found, to recover or to bar a recovery. They should never be argumentative, equivocal or unintelligible to the jury. What may be plain to a lawyer, or to a mind well trained to reason and to apply principles, may be to those not in the habit of reasoning, obscure and difficult of being understood.</p> <p>5. Instructions—Right of the Parties to Have—Not Lost, When.— The right of a party to a plain, simple instruction upon a material point, does not depend upon the action of the court at the instance of his adversary. And that right is not lost by having asked and obtained other instructions which only, by a not very obvious train of reasoning, refers to the same material point.</p>

<p>1. Courts—Exercise of Discretion—Subject to Review on Appeal.— In this State it is established that the exercise of discretion by the courts of original jurisdiction is subject to review on appeal.</p> <p>S. Contempt oe Court—Who are Liable.—Where a corporation and its hoard of directors are enjoined from doing certain specified acts, a person not a director, but having knowledge of the injunction, is equally guilty of contempt for violating it.</p> <p>3. Contempt—Disobeying Injunctions—Proceedings Against Persons Not in Terms Enjoined,—The rule upon a person not in terms enjoined should not be to show cause why he should not be attached and committed to jail for contempt of court in disobeying the injunction, but should be in knowingly and willfully aiding and abetting in disobeying and violating the injunction.</p> <p>4. Injunctions—Disobedience upon the Advice of Counsel.—Courts should hesitate before punishing as contempt an act advised by competent and reputable counsel.</p>

<p>1. Former Suit in Bar—Dismissal of Bill for Want of Equity.— Where a MU is dismissed without qualification the decree is conclusive as to aU matters involved, which are decided or might have been decided.</p> <p>2. Former Suit in Bar—Dismissal of Bill—Exception.—The only •exception to the rule is where, in case of the dismissal of the bill, it is apparent on the face of the pleadings, or in the decree of the court, that there was no hearing or adjudication upon the merits.</p> <p>3. Former Suit in Bar—An Unreversed Decree.—So long as a decree dismissing a bill stands unreversed, it makes no difference whether the cause was correctly decided or not, or what the reasons were that induced the court to dismiss the bill; it is an adjudication in bar.</p>

<p>1. Execution Sales—Who May Question Them.—If a sheriff’s sale on execution is irregular and voidable, but not void, none but parties to the proceeding can question it, and then only in the same case in the same court, or by appeal or writ of error.</p> <p>2. Judgments—Collateral Attack.—Where a court, in possession of complete jurisdiction over the parties and subject-matter, enters a judgment and proceeds to execute it, such judgment is binding and conclusive against all collateral attack.</p> <p>8. Judgments—Errors Intervening After Jurisdiction Attaches.— Errors intervening after jurisdiction attaches, and which might have affected the judgment, if urged at the proper time and in the proper forum, can not be effectively insisted upon in a collateral proceeding whether in law or equity.</p> <p>4. Judgment— Who May Attack Collaterally.—It is a rule of universal application that where a court has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject-matter, its judgment can not be attacked by one not a party to the proceeding.</p> <p>5. Jurisdiction—Freehold. Involved.—In order to oust the Appellate Court of its jurisdiction it is not enough that the freehold be affected by the suit, but it must be involved.</p> <p>6. Freehold—When Not Involved.-—A freehold is not directly involved in a chancery proceeding to vacate a judgment and set aside a sheriff's sale made under an execution issued upon it.</p>

<p>1. Exhibits—Must he Preserved in the Bill of Exceptions.—Exhibits offered in evidence on the trial of a suit, are not properly a part of the record, unless incorporated in a bill of exceptions.</p>

Memorandum.—Action on policy of insurance. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brent ano, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

<p>1. Injunction—What is, etc.—Assessment of Damages.—In a pending suit it was ordered that the defendant, Ms agents, solicitors and attorneys, and all persons acting in Ms behalf, absolutely desist and refrain from prosecuting, or taking any steps toward the prosecution of a certain suit at law, etc. It was held, that the order was an injunction, from the granting of which an appeal lies, and disobedience of which might be punished, and that it was within Sec. 12, Oh. 69, entitled “Injunctions,” providing that in all cases where an injunction is dissolved, damages may be assessed.</p>

Memorandum.—Scire facias on an appeal bond. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Francis Adams, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and reversed.

Memorandum.—Debt on appeal bond. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorándum. — Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Trespass on the case. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893; and affirmed.</p>

Memorándum.—Trespass on the case for damages to real property. Error to the Circuit Court of. Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorandum. —Forcible detainer. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. In the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. James Hoggin, Judge, presiding. Declaration in case; plea not guilty; trial by jury; verdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook'County; the Hon. Jonas Hutchinson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Bill to foreclose a chattel mortgage. Appointment of a receiver, etc. In the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Samuel P. McConnell, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1898, and order reversed.

<p>1. Chattel Mortgages—Void, When Securing Notes Not Maturing Within Two Years—A chattel mortgage given to secure notes, a part of which did not mature within the statutory limit of two years, is void as to judgment creditors, who have levied upon the mortgaged chattels.</p> <p>2. Chattel Mortgages—Days of Grace.—The extension of three days of grace beyond the day named, in a promissory note or bill of exchange for payment, has, either by the law merchant or statute, become a fixed and positive rule of law, and as much fixed upon and made a part of the contract between the parties as though it were written on ts face.</p> <p>3. Promissory Notes—Says of Grace.—The note does not become due, and the maker is not in dishonor and cannot be sued until the expiration of the days of grace.</p> <p>4. Chattel Mortgages—Maturity of Debt Secured—Days of Grace. —Where a chattel mortgage was given to secure a note, payable two years after date, such note being entitled to days of grace, it was held that the note did not mature and become payable until three days after the statutory limit of two years, within which the entire debt or obligation must mature. The mortgage was, therefore, as to the whole of the indebtedness secured by it, void as to execution creditors who had levied executions upon the property.</p> <p>5. Chattel Mortgages—Power to Declare Entire Debt Due.—Where a power to declare a debt due is in the mortgage and not in the notes secured by it, it was held to be a power conferred, in order to enable the mortgagee to take possession and make his money upon the happening of certain contingencies mentioned in the mortgage, irrespective of whether the contract had matured by its terms, or not. Whereas, the maturity referred to in the statute, is the maturity fixed by the terms of the notes, or other evidences of indebtedness, secured by the mortgage.</p> <p>6. Chattel Mortgages—Possession Taken on Default—What is Not Sufficient.—A mortgagee, upon default being made, requested the mortgagor, a corporation, to appoint its secretary custodian of the property pending a foreclosure, which was done, and the secretary took possession of the property, a large printing and publishing establishment. There was no visible change made by the secretary after he was appointed custodian, or by anybody else, either in the possession of the mortgaged property or in the method of conducting the business. The same signs remained on the building, and about the premises, and no new one was added; the business was continued in the name of the corporation; bills were incurred and were collected in the name of the corporation the same after as before the appointment of the custodian. Of about one hundred employes, not one, except the confidential book-keeper, was informed of any change; the same books and the same stationery were used, without mark or sign to indicate a change. It was held that the possession was not of the character required by law and was void as to third persons.</p> <p>7. Chattel Mortgages—Change of Possession on Default.—Secret assignments will not take the place of open and visible indications from which other persons may observe a change of possession.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Chancery. r Appeal from the Circuit Court of ' Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Originally commenced in justice’s court. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding. Heard in that court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brentano, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case. In 1889, the defendant in error was in the employ of the Chicago Anderson Pressed Brick Company. He had been at work for the company about five weeks shoveling clay, unloading clay from- cars and boats.

<p>Memorandum.—Forcible detainer. Appeal from the County Court of Cook County; the Hon. C. H. Donnelly, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Action for rent. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tothill, Judge, presiding. Declaration for rent, with copy of the lease sued on. Plea, general issue, not verified.

Memorandum.—Divorce proceedings. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and reversed, with directions to dismiss the bill.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement of the Case. On the 20th day of ¡November, 1889, appellee loaned to appellants the sum of $8,000, taking their note for the same, and as security therefor, a trust deed by them executed to one Otis E. Glover, of certain mining property land, together with machinery, etc., thereon.

<p>1. Damages—$1,500 Not Excessive.—A grocer’s delivery wagon was driven by a servant quite rapidly on the wrong side of the street, through a throng of people who had been stopped by a train of cars upon a track acrdss the street, and who, when there came an opening in the train, were hurrying through, and in so doing were off the sidewalk and in the street, and the servant ran over and injured the plaintiff. It was held, that a judgment for $¡1,500 was not excessive.</p> <p>2. Variance—Prceeipe and Declaration.—Where the prceeipe is in trespass and the declaration is in case the discrepancy furnishes no ground for an arrest of judgment, either under Sec. 22, Ch. 110, R. S., entitled “Practice,” or at common law.</p>

Memorándum.—Petition for discharge under the insolvent act. Appeal from the County Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Scales, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement oe the Case.

Memorandum.—Action on a promissory note. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1898, and affirmed.

<p>Memorandum.—Attachment. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brentano, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

<p>Memorandum.—Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Assumpsit for services, etc. Appeal from the Circuit ' Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Richard W. Clifford, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Voluntary assignments. Appeal from the County Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Scales, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and reversed with directions.

<p>1. Contract—Interpretation.—Where a contract is clear and biguous in its terms, it is error for the trial court to admit evidence as to what was meant by the parties to it. ,,</p>

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon County; the Hon. James A. Creighton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Error to the Circuit Court of Coles County; the Hon. Edward P. Vai£, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and afimned.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit for goods sold, etc. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Edgar County; the Hon. Ferdinand Bookwalter, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1898, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Actions for damages occasioned by death from negligent act. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Champaign County; the Hon. Edward P. Vail, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893.

<p>1. Guarantor—When Not Liable,—If the principal is not liable, the guarantor will not be.</p>

Memorandum. —Debt on official bond. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Ford County; the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Trespass for taking personal property. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Fulton County; the Hon, Jefferson Orb, Judge, presiding: Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Action of case against a common carrier for damage and loss of goods. Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean County: the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon County; the Hon. Jesse J. Phillips, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit for broker’s commissions. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion County; the Hon. Ferdinand Bookwalter, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893.</p>

Memorandum.—Action of case for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon County; the Hon. Jesse J. Phillips, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, A. D, 1.893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit for commissions on the sale of real estate. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Christian County; the Hon. James A. Creighton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed. Redeern’s Testimony. I reside in Buckhart township, and know the parties to this suit. I know the farm owned by Kelly, east of Taylorville. I had a conversation with Shumway & Johnson about August, before the farm was sold to Stine, about purchasing the farm.

<p>Memorandum.—Assumpsit. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion County; the Hon. Ferdinand Bookwalter, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.</p>

Memorandum.—Prosecution under the revenue law for failing to list property. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Scott County; the Hon. Cyrus Epler, Judge, presiding, Heard in this court at the May term, 1863.

Memorandum.—Assumpsit on a promissory note. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion County; the Hon. Edward P. Vail, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at. the May term, 1893, and affirmed,

Memorandum.—Action for deceit. In the Circuit Court of McLean County; the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. Judgment on demurrer to declaration; appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893.

<p>Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean County; the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. Heard in, this court at the May term, 1893.</p>

Menlorftndurn.-Action for damages for injury to stock. Appeal from the County Court of Morgan County; the Hon. 0. P. THOMPSON, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and atlirmed.

Memorandum.—Administration of estate. Error to reverse an order entered by the Circuit Court of Sangamon County, approving an administrator’s report on appeal from the County Court; the Hon. Jacob Fouke, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—Bill in chancery to reform a conveyance, and for injunction. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macon County; the Hon. Ferdinand Bookwalter, Judge, presiding. Decree for complainant. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed.

Memorandum.—In chancery. Bill to compel to the support of dependent relatives under the pauper act. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jersey County; the Hon. George W. Herdman, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the May term, 1893, and affirmed. Statement op the Case. This was a bill in chancery by appellee against appellant.