Volume 8 — Illinois Reports

In this case the defendants in error filed an affidavit in the usual form, alleging the insolvency of Denham, the plaintiff in interest, and moved the Court that he be required to give security for cbsts¡

Bill in Chancery to review and reverse a former decree, &c., in the Jo Daviess Circuit Court, filed by the appellants against the appellee. There was a demurrer to the bill, and at the March term 1845, the Hon. Thomas C. Browne presiding, the demurrer was sustained and the bill dismissed at the costs of the complainants, who appealed to this Court. The material portions of the bill appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Assumpsit in. the Jackson Circuit Court, brought by the appellant against the appellee, and heard before the Hon. Walter B. Scates and a jury, at the April term 1845. Verdict for the defendant for $325-60. The plaintiff moved for a new trial, whereupon the defendant entered a remittitur of the sum of $246-35. The Court overruled the motion for a new trial, and rendered a judgment in favor of the defendant for $79-25.

<p>Error to Jo Daviess.</p>

Bill in Chancery for an injunction, &c., in the Jersey Circuit Court, filed by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error, and heard before the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood, at the May term 1845, when the injunction, previously granted, was dissolved and the bill dismissed. The substance of the bill is set forth in'the Opinion of the Court.

Bill in Chancery for relief, &c., in the Scott Circuit Court, filed by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error. The cause was heard before the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood, at the October term 1845, when a decree was entered in favor of the complainant below. The allegations of the bill and the answers, the depositions of the witnesses, and the decree are substantially set forth in the Opinion of the Court.

Assumpsit in the Kane Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, and heard at the October term 1845, before the Hon. JohnD. Catón and a jury» ' Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff below for $256-58. A motion for a new trial waS made and overruled, and the defendant prosecuted an appeal in this Court.

Debt upon an appeal bond in the Boone Circuit Court, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error, and heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne, at the April term 1846, on motion of the defendant to dismiss the suit according to the terms of an agreement filed. The motion was allowed, and the suit dismissed at the costs of defendant. , The intervening proceedings are substantially stated by the Court.

Indictment against the plaintiff in error for receiving stolen goods, tried at the May term 1846, of the Lee Circuit Court, before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne and a jury. Verdict against the defendant below, in the form stated by the Court in their Opinion. The cause was submitted'to this Court without argument.

Debt upon an appeal bond given by the defendants in error to the plaintiff in error. The cause was heard in the Schuyler Circuit Court, at the September term 1845, before the Hon. Norman H. Purple, without the intervention of a jury, when a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff for $85-65, his debt, and six cents damages.

Information in the nature of Quo Warranto against the defendant in error, questioning his right to hold the office of justice of the peace of Belvidere precinct in the county of Boone. The cause was heard in the Circuit Court of that county before the Hon. Thos. C. Browne, at the September term 1846, upon a demurrer to the defendant’s answer.

Debt upon a bail bond executed by the plaintiff in error and others to the defendant in error, and heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne, in the Circuit Court of Jo Daviess county, at the June term 1843. During that term, the present plaintiff in error surrendered the principal debtor in open Court before any proceedings were had, and he was ordered into the custody of the sheriff.

The appellee recovered a judgment in the Kane Circuit Court against the appellants, five in number, all of whom prayed an appeal to this Court. It was granted upon condition that the defendants enter into bond with Oliver Ellithorpe, as surety. The bond was executed, within the time prescribed in the order of the Court, by four of the defendants and the surety.

Indictment for murder, in the Washington Circuit Court, at the September term 1845, against the plaintiff in error. The venue was changed to Clinton county and the cause there tried at the September special term 1845, the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner presiding. The jury found the defendant guilty of manslaughter, and sentenced him to one year’s imprisonment in the Penitentiary. The defendant prosecuted a writ of error in this Court.

This cause was decided at the last term of this Court, (ante 32) and at the present term, the appellants, hy Hardin ¡k Smith, their counsel, entered a motion to re-tax the fee bill issued therein, which was as follows, to wit: “Appellants, by their counsel, move the Court to direct the clerk of said Court to re-tax the fee bill by him issued 28th February, 1846, and to disallow and exclude from the same the second and sixth items in the same, because they have been therein…

Indictment for resisting an officer, &c., against the plaintiff in error, in the Edgar Circuit Court, heard at the October term 1846, before the Hon. Samuel H. Treat and a jury. A verdict of guilty was rendered, and the defendant was fined £20. The allegations in the indictment, and the several proceedings in the cause are substantially set forth in the Opinion of the Court.

This was an agreed case, originally filed in the Edgar Circuit Court. In that Court, the present defendant in error, its clerk, preferred a claim against the county of Edgar, amounting to $7-93, for fees accruing to him upon two forfeited recognizances on which the process of scire facias had been issued by him.

Trespass on the Case for crim. con. brought by the appellee against the appellant in the Lake Circuit Court. The case was heard before the Hon. Hugh T. Dickey, Judge of the Cook County Court, and a jury, at the September term 1846, when a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff below for $225 damages. A motion for a new trial was made, overruled, and judgment entered upon the verdict of the jury.

Thomas O. Browne, one of the Associate Justices of this Court, and presiding Justice in the Jo Daviess Circuit Court in the sixth Judicial Circuit. The motion was made to require him to sign and seal a bill of exceptions taken during the progress of the trial of a cause before him, wherein the Relators were plaintiffs and John H. Rountree and others were defendants, at the October term of the Jo Daviess Circuit Court, 1842.

In this case, Hart Fellows, one of the defendants in error, by his counsel, O. H. Browning & N. Bushnell, moved the Court to vacate a rule upon him to join in error, for the reason that all of his co-defendants were not before the Court. The motion was resisted by W. A. Minshall, in behalf of the plaintiffs in error.

Motion to dismiss an appeal bond for insufficiency. The facts of the case are stated by the counsel for the appellee in their brief.

Agreed case submitted to the Circuit Court of McLean county, at the April term 1846, the Hon. Samuel H. Treat presiding. Judgment for Temple, who was the plaintiff in the Court below, for $24*68. The evidence in the case is embraced in the Opinion of the Court.

In this cause a motion was made to dismiss the writ of error, unless the beneficial plaintiff should indemnify the nominal plaintiff against the costs of the suit. The affidavit, upon which the motion was founded, is substantially stated in the Opinion of the Court sustaining the motion.

Trespass quare clausum fregit, in the Cook Circuit Court, brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error, and heard before the Hon. Richard M. Young and a jury, at the March term 1844, when a verdict and judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff below for the sum of $33-40. The various proceedings in the case are stated in the Opinion of the Court. The case was submitted on briefs and written arguments.

Bill in Chancery, in the Alexander Circuit Court, filed by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error, and heard before the Hon. Walter B. Scates at the October term 1842. The bill was dismissed for want of equity. The substance of the bill appears in the Opinion of the Court.

Assumpsit, in the Cook County Court, brought by the appellees against the appellant. The case was heard at the November term 1846, the Hon. Hugh T. Dickey presiding. The defendant pleaded the pendency of an attachment suit in abatement, which plea appears in the brief of the counsel for the appellees. There was a demurrer to the plea, which the Court sustained.

This case was argued in. connection with the preceding, depended upon the same facts, and the same questions of law arose as in. the former case.

Debt, in the Madison Circuit Court, brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiffs in error, and heard before the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner, at the October term 1845, when a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs below for $2402, debt, and $1400, damages. The case, for the purposes of this decision, is sufficiently stated by the Court.

The grounds of the application made to this Court will appear in the petition filed and the affidavit accompanying it, both of which are incorporated into the Opinion.

Motion to quash a fee bill, issued by the Clerk of this Court for his fees on a writ of error prosecuted by one contacted in a criminal case in the Circuit Court. The judgment of the Court below was reversed, and the question arose here as to his liability for the costs which he had made.

Assumpsit in the Peoria Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, and heard before the Hon. John D. Catón, at the October term 1845. The defendant, failing to plead, his default was entered, and the plaintiff’s damages were assessed by a jury, who assessed the same at $148-96, upon which the Court rendered a judgment for that amount. The other proceedings in the Court below and in this Court are stated in the Opinion.

Motion in the Cook Circuit Court at the November term 1846, made by the defendant in error, to quash a fee bill. The motion was sustained by the Circuit Court, the Hon. Richard M. Young presiding. The-cause is brought into this Court upon an agreed statement of facts, which are briefly stated by the Court. The cause was here submitted upon this statement, and the following argument filed by

Ejectment in the Madison Circuit Court, brought by the plaintiffs in error against the defendant in error, and heard at the October term 1845, before the Hon, Gustavus P. Koerner and a jury, when a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendant. All the material facts of the case appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Bill in' Chancery in the Adams Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant to foreclose a mortgage. The defendant below filed a cross-bill, which, at the hearing before the Hon. Norman H. Purple, at the September term 1845, was dismissed, and a decree of foreclosure was rendered as prayed for in the original bill. The defendant appealed. An abstract of the pleadings and evidence in the cause will be found in the Opinion of the Court.

Bill in Chancery for an injunction, filed in the McLean Circuit Court by the appellants against the appellees, and heard at the April term 1845, before the Hon. Samuel H. Treat. It was then decreed that the complainants pay the defendant, Price, the sum of $100 by the first day of the next term, &c. and if payment was made, the injunction should be made perpetual. The complainants appealed from this decree. The material facts are stated by the Court.

Assumpsit in the Cook Circuit Court, brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiff in error, as assignor of of three several promissory notes. The cause was heard at the October term 1843, before the Hon. Richard M. Young and a jury, when a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs below for $193, the amount of the note last due. The material facts will appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Bill in Chancery to foreclose a mortgage, &c., brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error in the Menard Circuit Court, and heard before the Hon. Samuel H. Treat, when a decree of foreclosure, &c., was rendered. The facts appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Debt on a judgment of a Court in Maryland, brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error, in the Clark Circuit Court, and heard before the Hon. William Wilson, on a demurrer to pleas, which was sustained. The substance of those pleas will appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Assumpsit in the St. Clair Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, and heard before the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner, and a jury, at the October term 1846. Verdict for the plaintiff below for $525-00, upon which the Court rendered judgment. The pleadings, instructions asked, &c., appear in the Opinion of the Court.

This suit was commenced before a Justice of the Peace on the 17th day of May, 1841, by Wattles against Lalor. Wattles recovered a judgment for $81*44, and costs, from from which judgment Lalor took an appeal to the Will Circuit Court. At the May term, A. D. 1843, of said Circuit Court, the bankruptcy of the defendant was suggested and the cause thereupon continued.

Assumpsit in the McLean Circuit Court, brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error, and heard before the Hon. Samuel H. Treat without the intervention of a jury, at the September term 1841, when a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff below for $419-43. The pleadings and ruling of the Court below are stated in the Opinion.

Assumpsit in the Cook County Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, as acceptor of a certain bill of exchange. The case was heard at the February term of said Court, 1846, before the Hon. Hugh T. Dickey, without the intervention of a jury.

Motion to set aside a sale on execution, in the Jo Daviess Circuit Court, made by the plaintiffs in error against the defendants in error, and heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne, at the March term 1846. The motion was heard ex parte, and denied. The facts are briefly stated by the Court.

Bill in Chancery for an injunction, &c. in the St. Clair Circuit Court, brought hy the appellee against the appellant and others, and heard at the May term 1846, before the Hon. John D. Catón, who subsequently ordered a decree to be entered in vacation, making the injunction perpetual. Scott, one of the defendants, appealed to this Court. The substance of the bill, answers and testimony in the case is set out in the Opinion of the Court.

This action was originally brought in a justice’s court to recover of the defendant the amount of a justice’s judgment in favor of W. P. & H. Hunt, against Jabez Giddings, which judgment had been assigned by Hunt to the defendant, and by him to the plaintiff.

Petition for a mechanic’s lien, filed by the appellees against the appellant, in the Peoria Circuit Court, on the 27th day of October, A. D. 1841, where the cause was brought to an issue, but the venue was changed to Tazewell county in October, 1844, and, after beitfg continued from term to term, was finally determined at the April term 1846, of the Circuit Court in said county, the Hon. Samuel H. Treat presiding.

Assumpsit in the Jo Daviess Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, upon an assigned note, and heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne and a jury at the June term 1846, when a verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff below for $282. The pleadings and evidence in the cause are stated by the Court.

This was an appeal to the Circuit Court of Morgan county from the Probate Justice of the Peace, who issued a summons in the case, but did not attach thereto his seal of office, but affixed [Seal.] at the end of his signature. The summons was served upon the defendant below, Dunlap, and a judgment by default was rendered against him, for $70-22.

Complaint for a forcible entry and detainer, before Thomas Bryant, Esq. a justice of the peace of Peoria County, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error. At the trial before the said justice and a jury, a verdict and judgment were rendered for the complainant. The defendants appealed to the Circuit Court of Peoria County, and at the October term 1846, the Hon. John D. Catón presiding, the complaint, on motion of the defendants, was dismissed.

Case for a malicious prosecution, originally commenced by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error in the Cook Circuit Court, but removed by change of venue to the Du Page Circuit Court, and heard before the Hon. Richard M. Young and a jury at the May term 1846, when a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff for the sum. of $500. A motion for a new trial was made and overruled, to which the defendant excepted.

Debt upon a judgment recovered in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, in the State of Missouri, brought in the Tazewell Circuit Court by the appellees against the appellant, and heard at the April term 1846, before the Hon. Samuel H. Treat, without the intervention of a jury. A judgment was then rendered in favor of the plaintiffs for the sum of $851-55 debt, and $57-86 damages. From that judgment the defendant appealed.

Scire Facias upon a joint and several recognizance, in the Scott Circuit Court. The cause was heard before the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood, and a jury who rendered a verdiet in favor of the People for the penalty mentioned in the recognizance. The evidence, pleadings and instructions are fully stated by the Court.

Motion to quash a fee bill issued for the costs of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, in the foregoing cause. The motion was made by the plaintiff in error, who had succeeded in the prosecution of his writ. The items of the entire bill are embodied in the Opinion of the Court. The fee bill was quashed and a re-taxation of the costs ordered.

Asshmpsit in the McHenry Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, and heard before the Hon. Richard M. Young, without the intervention of a jury, at the November term 1846, when a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff below for 695-24. The defendant appealed from this judgment.

This was the case of an application made in the Peoria Circuit Court, by the defendant in error, under the statute, for an assessment of damages in his favor against the plain» tiff in error, Bryant, the former sheriff of Peoria county, and his securities, for official neglect, &c. The substance of this application and the various proceedings thereon will appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Scire Facias upon a joint and several recognizance entered into in the Morgan Circuit Court, &c. issued to Scott county, and there served upon three of the several sureties therein. Those served with process appeared before the said Court at the May term 1846, the Hon. SamuelD.

Indictment, in the Franklin Circuit Court, against the plaintiff in error for obstructing a constable in the execution of process, tried before the Hon. Walter B. Scates and a jury, at the August term 1846, when a verdict of guilty was rendered, and a fine of $30 imposed by the Court. The defects in the indictment are noticed by the Court.

Ejectment in the Peoria Circuit Court, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error, and heard before the Hon. John D. Catón and a jury, at the October term 1846. Verdict and judgment for the defendant below. The evidence submitted to the jury is substantially set forth in the Opinion of the Court.

Motions, in the Madison Circuit Court, to quash two executions issued from that Court in -favor of appellee against appellant, made by the appellant at the May term 1846, the Hon. John D. Catón presiding. On hearing the motions, the Court denied the same, and an appeal was taken from that decision.

Indictment for murder against the plaintiff in error, tried in the Warren Circuit Court, at the November term 1846, before the Hon. Norman H. Purple and a jury, when a verdict of guilty was rendered and sentence of death pronounced.

Bill in Chancery for relief, &c. in the Madison Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellants. The allegations of the bill, the answers of the defendants below, the testimony of witnesses, and the decree of the Circuit Court are substantially set forth in the Opinion of the Court.

Scire Facias,.upon a recognizance to the- People, &c. at the July term 1842, of the Sangamon Circuit Court, the Hon. Samuel H. Treat presiding. The plaintiff in error, who was one of three defendants in the Court below, was duly served, but made default, and judgment was rendered thereon against him only for $800. . There had been two returns of “nihil” as to one of the others, and service upon a third.

In this case, a motion was made by the counsel for the defendant in error to quash the writ of error, first, because the writ would not lie, and second, because it was prosecuted in the name, of unknown persons.

Bill in Chancery, for leave to sell real estate, &c. filed by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error, in the Peoria Circuit Court, and heard before the Hon. John D. Catón, at the October term 1843. A sale was ordered, &c. The facts and proceedings in the case are sufficiently stated in the argument of the counsel for the plaintiffs in error, and in the Opinion of the Court.

Action on the Case, in the Cook Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellants, and heard at the November term 1845, before the Hon. Richard M. Young without the intervention.of a jury, when a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff below for $1001-32. The facts, &c. are stated by the Court.

Debt, in the Winnebago Circuit Court, brought originally by the intestate of the defendant in error against, the plaintiffs in error. The cause was heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne and a jury, at the August term 1846, when two judgments were rendered for the plaintiff below, of different amounts against different defendants, one upon the verdict of the jury, and the other upon the clerk’s assessment of the damages. The case is briefly stated in the Opinion of the Court.

Bill in Chancery, for an increase of alimony, the custody of two infant children, and an allowance for their maintenance. The hill was filed in the Edwards Circuit Court by the appellee against the appellant, and heard before the Hon. William Wilson, at the September term 1845. A decree was rendered, awarding the custody of the children to the complainant below, their mother, and an allowance of sixty dollars a year for five years. The defendant appealed to this Court.

Forcible entry and detainer, originally commenced before a justice of the peace of Jo Daviess county by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error. The case was taken by appeal to the Jo Daviess Circuit Court, and there tried before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne and a jury, at the October term 1843, when a verdict of guilty was rendered against the defendants below. The allegations of the complaint are substantially set. forth in the Opinion of the Court.

Forcible Entry and Detainer, in the Peoria Circuit Court, originally commenced before a justice of the peace in that county by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error. The cause came on to be heard before the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner, at the May term 1846, when the complaint was dismissed for want of jurisdiction in the justice of the peace. The defects in the complaint are pointed out by the Court in the Opinion.

Replevin in the Cook Circuit Court, brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiff in error, and heard before the Hon. Richard M. Young and a jury, at the November term 1844, when a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs below. The pleadings, evidence and instructions asked, appear in the Opinion of the Court. The cause was submitted on the written arguments of counsel, which have been condensed for this Report.

The following statement of facts was submitted by the parties for the opinion of the Court: 1. That by an Act passed March 1,1845, establishing the Jo Daviess County Court, provision was also made for the election of a Prosecuting Attorney by the Legislature, and his salary fixed at one hundred dollars per annum, payable quarter yearly out of the State Treasury. 2.

Replevin, in the Marshall Circuit Court, brought by the appellant against the appellees, at the October term 1846, and heard before the Hon. John D. Catón. The plaintiff, on the exclusion of certain evidence, consented that a nonsuit should be entered with leave to move to set it aside, and for a new trial. It was accordingly entered, and afterwards a motion was made to set it aside, and for a new trial, but the motion was overruled, and the plaintiff excepted.

Debt, in the Stephenson Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, and heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne and a jury, when a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff below for $400 damages, and judgment accordingly.

Ejectment, in the Jo Daviess County Court, brought by the appellees against the appellant, and tried before the Hon. Hugh T. Dickey without the intervention of a jury at he July term 1846, when the case was taken under Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs below at the November term following.

Trover, originally commenced before the Probate Justice of Massac county by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error. The defendant appealed to the Circuit Court of said county, and the cause was heard before the Hon. Walter B. Scates and a jury, at the May term 1846, when a verdict was rendered for the defendant.

Bill for a specific performance, &c., in the Peoria Circuit Court, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error, and heard before the Hon. John D. Catón, at the May term 1845. when a decree was rendered, dismissing the bill and directing each party to pay their own costs. So much of the bill as is material to the determination of this suit appears in the Opinion of the Court.

Petition for a mandamus, &c. in the Madison Circuit Court, at the term 1846, the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner presiding. There was a demurrer to the petition, which was sustained by the Court. The substance of the petition is stated by the Court.

<p>This was a proceeding originally commenced before the Probate Justice of Hancock county, to prove a claim in favor of the appellee against the estate of Moses J. Wallace, deceased, which was allowed. The administrator appealed to the Circuit Court of said county, and a trial was had before the Hon. Norman H. Purple and a jury, at the May term 1846, when a verdict was rendered in favor of the claimant for $255.</p> <p>The Court then entered the following judgment: “Whereupon it is ordered by the Court, that the said plaintiff have and recover the sum of $255, the sum so found by the jury aforesaid, together with costs by him in this behalf expended, as well in the Court below as in this Court, and that he have execution therefor against the goods and chattels and effects in the said administrator’s hands, to be administered in the due course of administration,” from which the administrator appealed.</p> <p>The cause was submitted in this Court on the written arguments of counsel.</p>

Debt, in the Madison Circuit Court, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error, and heard before the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner, at the October term 1846, on a demurrer to a plea in abatement. The demurrer was overruled, and a judgment for costs rendered in favor of the defendant below. The facts and the subject matter of the plea are stated in the Opinion of the Court.

Assumpsit, for money had and received, brought by the appellee against the appellant, in the Sangamon Circuit Court. It was submitted to the Court upon an agreed case, when a pro forma decision was entered, that the plaintiff recover of the defendant the sum of f 200, and costs. The principal facts are stated by the Court.

Motion, in the Sangamon Circuit Court, to .set aside a Master’s sale of mortgaged estate, &c., made by the plaintiff in error, who was complainant in the suit of foreclosure. The foundation of the motion is stated by the Court. It was heard at the November term 1846, before the Hon, Samuel H. Treat, when the motion was denied.

Petition for a mechanics5 lien, &c, in the White Circuit Court, heard at the September term. 1846, before the Hon. William Wilson. The facts are as follow: The plaintiffs in error furnished materials, and did work on a house for William Weed in his lifetime, but owing to his death the job was left unfinished. Weed, at his death, left Harriet, his widow, and William, his son and only heir at law.

Bill in Chancery, filed by the appellee for the benefit of himself and the creditors of Jacob B. Miller, one of the appellants, in the Winnebago Circuit Court, and heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne, at the August term 1846, upon general and special demurrers to the bill.

Bill in Chancery for relief &c., in the Winnebago Circuit Court, heard before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne, upon a demurrer to the bill, which was sustained and the bill dismissed at the cost of the present plaintiffs, in error, who were complainants in the Court below. The several causes of demurrer are fully stated and commented on by the Court in their Opinion.

Scire Facias, in the Madison Circuit Court, brought by the nominal plaintiffs below, who are defendants here, for the use of the beneficial plaintiff, against the present plaintiff in error. Judgment was rendered against the defendant below on a demurrer to one of his pleas. He prosecutes a writ of error, and the several assignments of error will appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Bill in Chancery, &c. in the Morgan Circuit Court, filed by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error, and heard before the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood, at the October term 1846. The complainant offered to file a supplemental bill setting up additional facts, &c. Which hill was .submitted to the inspection of the Court, and permission to file it was refused. The cause was then heard and the complainant’s bill was dismissed.

Bill in Chancery for relief, &c., in the La Salle Circuit Court, filed by the appellee against the appellant, and heard before the Hon. John D. Catón, at the March term 1845, when a decree was rendered in favor of the complainant below. The substance of the bill and the decree, and the testimony in the cause, will appear in the Opinion of the Court.

This was a proceeding uiider the statute to establish the amount due from Gregory to Stow for rent, after the levy of a distress Warrant. The case was originally heard before a justice of the peace in Cook County and a jury, when a verdict was rendered in favor of Gregory for $31, he having produced and proved, a set-off. Stow appealed to the Circuit Court, where the case was tried before the Hon. Richard M. Young and a jury.

Debt for the statute penalty for selling property exempt from execution, &c. brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error, a deputy of the sheriff of Morgan county. The case was heard in the Circuit Court of said county, before the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood, without the intervention of a jury, when a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff below for three times the value of the property levied upon and sold.

Trespass, vi et armis for assault, debauchery and carnal knowledge of the daughter of the appellee, brought by the latter against the appellant in the Coles Circuit Court, and tried before the Hon. William Wilson and a jury, at the May term 1845. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff below, and assessed his damages at $656, upon which .the Court rendered a judgment. The instruction of the Court below excepted to is embodied in the, Opinion of this Court.

Ejectment, in the Morgan Circuit Court, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error, and heard before the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood upon the plea of not guilty, &c. The Court found the issue for the defendant, and rendered judgment accordingly. The evidence introduced by the parties is stated by the Court.

This was a proceeding originally commenced before the Probate Justice of Rock Island county by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error. Judgment being rendered against the former for $1,450, he appealed to the Circuit Court, and afterwards took a.change of venue to Warren county, where the cause, by agreement of the parties, was tried on its merits before the Hon.. Norman H. Purple and a jury.

Attachment, in the Cass Circuit Court, brought by the appellant against the appellee, and heard at the May term 1846, before the Hon. Samuel D. Lockwood, when a judgment was rendered for the appellee. The pleadings and agreed state of facts will appear in the Opinion of the Court. The cause was submitted for the determination of this Court, upon the written arguments of J. J. Hardin <$• J). A. Smith, for the appellant, and, W. A. Minshall & R. S. Blackwell, for the appellee.

Ejectment, in the Adams Circuit Court, originally brought by the appellant against the appellee, Brunton. Subsequently the other appellee, John P. King, was let in to defend the suit, and pleaded for himself and Brunton.

Bill in Chancery, for relief, &c., filed in the Madison Circuit Court, by the appellant against the appellees, and heard before the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner, at the October term 1846, when a special decree was rendered adjusting the equities of the parties. The complainant in the cause below appealed to this Court.

Debt, in the St. Clair Circuit Court, brought by the appellee against the appellant, and heard before the Hon. Gustavus P. Koerner, and a jury, when a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendant below for $250-68 debt, and' 256-77 damages. The various pleadings, instructions asked and evidence offered in the case at the trial in the Court below, will sufficiently appear in the Opinion of the Court.

Indictment for forgery, in the Adams Circuit Court, against the present plaintiff in error, at the April term 1845, tried before the Hon. Richard M. Young. The jury found the defendant guilty and fixed the period of his imprisonment in the penitentiary at nine years. Judgment according!;7. The instruments charged to have been forged are set forth in haze verba in the Opinion of the Court, as also the material portions of the evidence, &c.