text:
    Sadie D. Bowers, Appellant, v. William F. Claxton, Appellee.
    Gen. No. 24,031.
    1. Workmen’s Compensation Act, § 3

      —what not extrahazardous employment. In an action by an employee to recover for personal injuries, the work in which plaintiff was engaged held not to be extrahazardous, within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1913 [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶ 5475(1) et seq.].
    2. Workmen’s Compensation Act, § 12

      —when reference to in declaration considered as surplusage. In an action by an employee to recover for personal injuries, while references to the Workmen’s Compensation Act are improperly included in the declaration when the act does not apply, such references will be treated as merely surplusage when the counts state a good cause of action at common law.
    3. Pleading, $ 369

      —how surplusage in declaration may he reached. Surplusage in a declaration cannot be reached by either a general or special demurrer, but the proper procedure is a motion to strike.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Robert E. Crowe, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed December 4, 1918.
    Munson T. Case, for appellant.
    No appearance for appellee.

      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.

Sadie D. Bowers brought suit against William F. Claxton to recover for personal injuries. The declaration as finally amended consisted of seven counts, to which a general demurrer was sustained and the cause dismissed at plaintiff’s costs.

All of the counts of the declaration, except the fifth, averred, in substance, that at the time in question the defendant was the proprietor of, owned, managed and operated, a certain business known as the “Hotel Darlington” situated in Chicago, and that plaintiff was employed by the defendant. The nature of the business and the surrounding circumstances in which plaintiff was employed and the manner in which she was injured were set forth, and it was averred that this employment was not extrahazardous, and did not come within the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1913 [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶ 5475(1) et seq.]. It was further averred that the business was nonhazardous and that defendant had not elected to come under the act. The fifth count is simply a common-law count for personal injuries, no reference being made to the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Bach of the counts states a good common-law canse of action.

We have been favored with no brief on behalf of the defendant, and as the demurrer was general, we are unable to determine the reason why the court sustained it and dismissed the suit. But we are informed by counsel for plaintiff that the action of the court was due to the fact that at the time there had been no decisión construing the Workmen’s Compensation Act, and the court took the view that all employees and employers were within the act, and therefore the instant case seeking to enforce a common-law liability would not lie.

The Compensation Act provides that if the occupation, enterprise or business which is being conducted is extrahazardous as defined by the act, then the employer is conclusively presumed to be within the act, unless he has filed notice to the contrary with the Industrial Board, and if he files such notice, then, in case an action is brought against him to recover damages for personal injuries, the common-law defenses of assumed risk, fellow-servant and contributory negligence are not available to him. Sections 1, 2 and 3, Compensation Act of 1913 [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶¶ 5475(1), (2), (3)]. The act further provides that if the work is nonhazardous, then the employer may elect to come within its terms, by filing a notice of such intention with the Industrial Board. Section 1, Compensation Act of 1913. There are also provisions for election by the employee which need not be referred to here.

Manifestly, if the Compensation Act does not apply, the common-law rights and liability are in no way affected. If the act does apply, then no recovery can be had in a common-law action, but the remedy is such as is provided by the act. We think it clear that under the allegations of the declaration, the work in which plaintiff was engaged at the time of her injuries was not extrahazardous within the meaning of the act. Uphoff v. Industrial Board of Illinois, 271 Ill. 312 [13 N. C. C. A. 80]. This being true, the act did not apply, and no reference should have been made to it in the declaration. But since each count states a good cause of action at common law, the most that can be said is that the allegations in reference to the Compensation Act are surplusage, and this defect in pleading cannot be reached by either a general or special demurrer, but a motion to strike is the proper procedure. 1 Chitty’s Pleading (17th Amer. Ed.), pp. 326, 327; Lesher v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 144 Ill. App. 632, 239 Ill. 502; Burnap v. Wight, 14 Ill. 301; La Monte v. Kent, 163 Ill. App. 1. It follows that the demurrer was improperly sustained.

The judgment of the Circuit Court of Cook county is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to overrule the demurrer.

Reversed cmd remanded with directions.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

license: Public Domain

text:
    Albert Pick & Company, Appellee, v. George K. Spoor, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,049.
    1. Chattel mortgages, § 68a

      —when acknowledgment sufficient. The fact that a chattel mortgage is acknowledged by an attorney in fact before a deputy clerk of the Municipal Court of Chicago, in the name of the clerk, while the power of attorney authorized him to acknowledge it before the clerk of that court, does not render the acknowledgment insufficient.
    2. Clerks oe courts, § 12

      —what is power of deputy clerk as-to taking acknowledgment. A deputy clerk of the Municipal Court of Chicago has power to use the name of the clerk of the court in taking an acknowledgment of a chattel mortgage, and such acknowledgment is as binding on the principal and third parties as if it had been taken by the clerk personally.
    3. Chattel mortgages, § 203

      —when failure of mortgagee to take possession is fraud as to third persons. Possession of mortgaged chattels must be taken by the mortgagee within a reasonable time after default in payment or other condition broken by the mortgagor, and failure to take such possession is fraud per se as to third persons and not subject to explanation.
    4. Chattel mortgages, § 203

      —what is reasonable time for mortgagee to take possession after default. The reasonable time in which the mortgagee of chattels is required to take possession after a default in payment or breach of other condition is to be determined from the special circumstances in each case.
    5. 1 Bills and notes, § 270

      —when demand of payment unnecessary. A note payable on demand is payable at once, and suit can be maintained on it without any demand.
    6. Chattel mortgages, § 140

      —when lien lost as against rights orf distraining landlord. Where a chattel mortgage is given to secure the payment of seven notes bearing the same date, six of them representing monthly instalments and being payable monthly and the seventh being payable on demand, after date, and default is made in the payment of the last three of the six notes, the lien of the mortgage is lost so far as it concerns the rights of the mortgagor’s landlord, where he distrained for rent after the default in the instalments, even though the mortgagee thereafter made demand on the mortgagor for the payment of the seventh note and, not having received payment, demanded the property which had been taken under the distress warrant.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Richabdson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed December 4, 1918.
    William A. Jennings, for appellant.
    Mayer, Meyer, Austrian & Platt, for appellee.

      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

   Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.

Albert Pick & Company, a corporation, brought an action of replevin against George K. Spoor. There was a trial before the court without a jury, and a finding and judgment in favor of plaintiff, to reverse which defendant prosecutes this appeal.

Plaintiff’s right of possession of the property was based on a chattel mortgage given to it by the owner, dated April 17, 1917, acknowledged before the clerk of the Municipal Court of Chicago, May 2, 1917, and recorded in the recorder’s office of Cook county, Illinois, May 7, 1917. The chattel mortgage was given to secure the payment of $325, evidenced by seven promissory notes, all dated April 17, 1917. Note No. 1 was for $75, and the others were for $40 each. The first six notes represented monthly instalments, one being due on the 17th of each month. Note No. 7 was due “on demand, after date.” Default was made in payment of the notes maturing in August, September and October. On -November 10, 1918, the defendant distrained the property for nonpayment of rent due from the owner. Afterwards plaintiff demanded payment from the owner of note No. 7, and payment not having been made, it demanded the property which had been taken by the defendant under the distress warrant. The demand was refused and thereupon plaintiff instituted the instant suit in replevin.

The first point made by the defendant is that the mortgage is invalid as to third parties, it not having been properly acknowledged. In support of this it is urged that the mortgage was acknowledged by an attorney in fact under a power of attorney executed by the mortgagor which authorized the appearance by the attorney in fact before Frank P. Danisch, clerk of the Municipal Court of Chicago; while the evidence showed that such attorney acknowledged it before a deputy clerk of the Municipal Court, although the acknowledgment was in the name of the clerk of the court. We think there is no merit in this contention. The deputy clerk had the power to use the name of the clerk of the court. It was within the scope of his authority, and is binding on the principal and third parties the same as if performed by the clerk personally. Hope v. Sawyer, 14 Ill. 254; Woodward v. Donovan, 167 Ill. App. 503.

The next point is that all of the notes evidencing the indebtedness to secure which the mortgage was given were long since overdue, and therefore the lien of the mortgage was gone, so far as it affected the defendant and other third parties. Section 4 of the Chattel Mortgage Act (J. & A. ¶ 7579) provides that if a chattel mortgage is bona fide, it shall be a good and valid lien on the property “from the time it is filed for record until the maturity of the entire debt or obligation,” provided such time shall not exceed 3 years from the filing of the mortgage, etc. It has long been the law of this State that possession of the mortgaged chattels must be taken by the mortgagee within a reasonable time after default in payment or other condition broken by the mortgagor; that failure to take such possession is a fraud per se as to third parties, not subject to explanation. This rule is based upon the principle that a conveyance of personal property where possession is permitted to remain in the vendor, as in the instant case, is fraudulent per se and void as to creditors and purchasers, unless the retaining of possession is consistent with the mortgage. Jones v. Noel, 139 Ill. 377. And what is such reasonable time in which the mortgagee must take possession must be determined from the special circumstances in each case. (Richley v. Childs, 114 Ill. App. 173, and cases cited.) In that case it was held that failure to take possession for 3 days after default was unreasonable. Counsel for both sides concede this to be the law, but plaintiff contends that note No. 7 was not due until demand for payment had been made, and that immediately after such demand was made, it sought to obtain possession of the property, and, being unable to do so, brought replevin; that there was no delay after the maturity of the note, and therefore the lien of its mortgage was not lost. In support of its position plaintiff cites Slingo v. Steele-Wedeles Co., 82 Ill. App. 139; Pulling v. Travelers’ Ins. Co., 55 Ill. App. 452, and other cases. In the Slingo case, supra, it is said that while a note payable on demand is due at once, and that without a demand suit may be maintained upon it, yet for the purpose of foreclosure of a chattel mortgage securing the note, where it is sought to enforce a forfeiture, demand must first be made for payment. In the Pulling case, supra, the action was upon a life insurance policy. The defense was that the policy was forfeited because the premiums had not been paid.' It appeared that the insured had given his note payable on demand for the premium, and it was held that the note “could not be regarded as matured for the purposes of forfeiture, except by demand on the maker.” It is clear that these cases are not in point. The instant case is not between the mortgagor and mortgagee of chattels, but between the mortgagee and a third party, and the statute says that the mortgage shall be good as against him until the maturity of the debt. It has been repeatedly held that a note payable on demand is payable at once. Hall v. Jones, 32 Ill. 38; Knecht v. Boshold, 138 Ill. App. 430. And suit can be maintained on it without any demand. Slingo v. Steele-Wedeles Co., supra; Pulling v. Travelers’ Ins. Co., supra. In the instant case, note No. 7 was due “on demand after date,” and was therefore due and payable April 18,1917, several months before the demand for payment was made. The lien of the chattel mortgage, so far as the defendant was concerned, was therefore gone. If plaintiff’s argument is sound, that the note is not due or matured until payment is demanded, it might never become due, because a demand might never be made.

The judgment of the Municipal Court of Chicago is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.


author: Mr. Justice Taylor

text:
    H. B. Odell, Appellee, v. Chicago Great Western Railroad Company, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,045.
    1. Master and servant, § 81

      —when burden of showing hiring by month not sustained. The burden Is on plaintiff, In an action by an employee to recover wages, to show by a preponderance of the evidence that his hiring was by the month where he contends that such was the case, and this burden is not sustained by showing that he was paid at a monthly rate.
    2. Master and servant, § 14

      —when no hiring for fixed period. Where there is no specification of any particular time of service agreed upon in a contract of hiring, there is no hiring for any fixed period.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John F. Haas, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and judgment here.
    Opinion filed December 24, 1918.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw, for appellant; Ralph M. Shaw and Frank H. Towner, of counsel.
    H. A. Tiffany, for appellee.

      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

   Mr. Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court.

The plaintiff, Odell, having been employed by the defendant, the Chicago Great Western Railroad Company, some time in February, 1913, in the freight claim department, and being discharged on August 24, 1917, brought suit claiming that as his wages were $110 a month, and as he worked for the defendant until August 24, 1917, when he was summarily discharged, without notice, there is due him $110 for the month beginning August 16, 1917, and ending September 16, 1917.

The evidence of the plaintiff is to the effect that he worked for the defendant for 4% years; that he was hired by the month; that originally he was sent for and they said they would pay him $90 a month; that subsequently his wages were raised to $110 a month; that on August 24, 1917, he received a written notice from the defendant that his services would not be required after August 24, 1917; that he was paid $55 on August 14, 1917; that on August 24, 1917, he received a memorandum from the defendant which stated that he had been employed in the office as investigator “during the second period of August, as follows: 8y2 days at $110.00. . .$30.16”; that his wages were paid in semimonthly instalments of $55 each; that he based the conclusion that he was hired by the month on the fact that he received $110 each month.

The defendant called two witnesses, G. H. Hunt, freight claim agent, and A. P, Harris, a claim investigator. The evidence of Hunt is to the effect that he discharged the plaintiff for cause; that his work showed that he was not giving the attention to it that it should have received; that his work indicated “that he was slipping, that he was not giving proper attention to his desk, as he should have done”; that after he discovered he was “slipping” he moved him from the desk which handled coal, sewer pipe and tile to the “line desk” so as to get an opportunity to look over his desk and see what conditions were; that he had an investigation made of the desk that he was removed from and “found the conditions to be somewhat deplorable”; that he gave instructions to one Harris, a chief loss and damage investigator, to go over Odell’s desk; that one Cannon, the' chief clerk, told him that the desk showed general neglect, and produced several claims showing “that they had not been handled or anything done to them for 30 to 40 days, and even longer, claims that could have been disposed of and were disposed of afterwards in a short while”; that the condition was reported to him on the morning of August 24,1917; that he discharged him that day. Hunt, in his testimony, also pointed out specifically certain claims which had been neglected and not properly attended to by the plaintiff. The evidence of Hunt, who personally hired the plaintiff in February, 1913, is to the effect that he told the plaintiff “to gó to work.” The witness Harris, the claim investigator, who had general supervision of the desks and handled the defective claims, is to the effect that pursuant to instructions from Hunt, the freight claim agent, about the 22nd of August, 191.7, he looked over the plaintiff’s desk, examining the claims, cheeking them up, etc.; that he “found it was in a general neglected condition”; that he “found that there were letters from claimants asking about claims that had not been answered for 30 to 40 days, some of them 50 days”; that “there was a lot of claims there that should be attended to that would have enabled the payment of claims that had not been attended to”; that some of the claims were 3 and 4 months old and had not received any attention; that he reported the condition of the desk to one Cannon, the first assistant to Hunt. The evidence of the plaintiff in regard to the quality of his work is to the effect that the work came in so fast that he could not keep up with it and that he had complained to Harris that the desk was getting behind; that no complaint was ever made to him.

The defendant, on the theory that the plaintiff’s employment might have expired on August 24, 1917, made a tender in the trial court of $30.16 as wages for 8% days between August 15 and August 24, 1917. It was refused.

At the close of the evidence the defendant submitted three propositions of law, all of which were refused by the trial judge. They are as follows:

‘ ‘ First. The court holds as a matter of law that the hiring of plaintiff by defendant was for no specified time, and that, therefore, the hiring was at will and could be terminated by either plaintiff or defendant at the will of either.
“Second. The court holds as a matter of law that defendant was justified in discharging the plaintiff, and that, therefore, there can be no recovery in this case beyond the amount of the tender.
“Third: The court holds as a matter of law that the hiring in this case was a hiring at will, and that defendant could discharge plaintiff at any time, even though defendant’s dissatisfaction was not founded in reason.”

The cause was tried without a jury and a judgment in the sum of $110 and costs was entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the appellee.

Two questions arise: (1) Was the plaintiff employed by the month, or by the day at the rate .of $110? (2) Was he discharged for cause?

(1) There is no evidence of the specific details of the hiring of the plaintiff, save (1) as it appears in the evidence of Hunt, who testified that he told the plaintiff to go to work, and (2) that after being hired the plaintiff’s wages were at the rate of $90 a month and subsequently $110 a month. The $110 was paid to him in semimonthly instalments of $55 on the 1st and 15th of each month. In Chadwick v. Morris & Co., 170 Ill. App. 569, this court said: “The plaintiff testified : ‘I told him (Borders) that the least I would go for was $1,500 a year; and he said “all right.” ’ This can in no way be construed into a definite hiring for one year. (Bunnell v. Rosenberg, 126 Ill. App. 196; Pfund v. Zimmerman, 29 Ill. 269.) The evidence shows that the minds of the parties met only as to the amount or rate of compensation.” So here, the plaintiff has failed to introduce evidence which shows that the minds of the parties met save as to hiring at will.

The burden of proving that the plaintiff was hired by the month was upon him. He must prove that fact by a preponderance of the evidence. Wood, Master and Servant, sec. 136. Defendant denied that the hiring was by the month. The plaintiff testified that he based his opinion that he was hired by the month on the fact that he was paid by the month but, unfortunately, that fact only pertains to the rate and quantity of wages and, in no way, connotes duration of employment. ! Outside of the testimony of Hunt that he told him to go to work and that he, the plaintiff, was paid first at the rate of $90 a month and subsequently at the rate of $110 a month, and that the latter amount was paid in semimonthly instalments of $55, there is no evidence whatever of any other terms of the hiring, and, under the circumstances, it must be considered as a hiring at will and the plaintiff could leave or be discharged at any time..J Where there is no specification of any particular time of service agreed upon, there is no hiring for any fixed period. Pfund v. Zim merman, 29 Ill. 269; Chadwick v. Morris & Co., supra; Resener v. Watts, Ritter & Co., 73 W. Va. 342, 51 L. R. A. (N. S.) 629; Watson v. Gugino, 204 N. Y. 535.

(2) Inasmuch as we are of the opinion it was a hi ring- at will, it is unnecessary to consider whether the plaintiff was discharged for cause.

Owing to the foregoing errors, the judgment is reversed and judgment will be entered here in the sum of $30.16 in favor of the appellee.

Reversed amd judgment here.


author: Mr. Justice Thomson

text:
    La Salle Opera House Company for use of Goes Lithographing Company, Appellee, v. La Salle Amusement Company, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 23,813.
    1. Fbaudulekt conveyances, § 15

      —what is sale prohibited by Bulk Sales Act. The Bulk Sales Act [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶ 10021(1) et seq.] is not to be construed as limited, in application, to such goods as are subject, in the course of the vendor’s business, to sale other than in bulk, but must be considered as comprehending and applying to all bulk sales of any kind of goods and chattels of the vendor’s business, if such sale is otherwise than in the ordinary course of trade and in the regular and usual prosecution of the vendor’s business, and applies to the sale by a corporation of all the goods and chattels and other property owned by it and used by it in operating a theatre.
    2. Statutes, § 205

      —when later act presumed to be intended to be of general application. Where an act relating to a certain matter has been held unconstitutional as class legislation and thereafter another act is passed relative to such matter, it will be "presumed that the later act was intended to be of general application, and it will be so construed if susceptible of such construction.

      3. Appeal and bbrob, § 390

      —what point in garnishment proceeding may not first he raised on appeal. The objection that the record fails to show by any evidence that the requirement of the Garnishment Act (J. & A. ¶ 5936 et seq.), as to the issuance and return of execution, was not complied with, cannot he first raised on appeal.
    4. Appeal and ebbob, § 1303

      —when evidence presumed sufficient to support court’s findings. On appeal the evidence will he presumed to have been sufficient to support the court’s findings where the bill of exceptions contains no recital that it includes all of the evidence in the case.
    5. Garnishment, § 24

      —when property illegally sold in hulh may he reached hy. The fact that property sold at a sale, void under the Bulk Sales Act [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶ 10021(1) et seq.], was subject to existing valid liens which would have exhausted its full value, does not prevent a creditor of the vendor from reaching the property in the vendee’s hands by garnishment.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago;. the Hon. John Richardson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed December 4, 1918.
    Rehearing denied December 17, 1918.
    Wickett, Walker & Wegg, for appellant; Silber, Isaacs, Silber & Woley and Clarence J. Silber, of counsel.
    Adolph Marks, for appellee.

      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

   Mr. Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the G-oes Lithographing Company, plaintiff, and against the La Salle Amusement Company, the garnishee, for the sum of $1,348.18.

The La Salle Opera House Company, the nominal plaintiff, was engaged in operating the La Salle Theatre, in the City of Chicago, under a lease of the premises occupied by the theatre. In 1913, this company issued bonds in the sum of $40,000, to secure which, it executed a deed of trust, covering the leasehold and all the personalty it owned and used in connection with the operation of the theatre. The company did not succeed, but made default in the payment of some of the bonds, which were in serial form. Thereupon, in 1914, the La Salle Amusement Company purchased, by bill of sale, from the La Salle Opera House Company, “all and singular, the furniture, fixtures and equipment of every kind and character, and all tangible property and good will of the theatrical business and theatre known as the La Salle Theatre, its trade-mark and trade names and all other property or effects of said La Salle Opera House Company,” and also the said leasehold estate, paying for all said property the sum of $50,000. At the time of this sale the Goes Lithographing Company was a creditor of the La Salle Opera House Company. The $50,000 was used by the latter to retire the outstanding bonds, in the sum of $40,000, and the balance was consumed in satisfying various lien claims against the. leasehold estate. No part of it was paid to the Goes Lithographing Company. The latter company was never notified of the said sale and "transfer of all its property by the vendor, nor by the vendee, nor was any attempt made by the parties to comply with the provisions of the Bulk Sales Act of 1913 [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶ 10021(1) et seq.]. Subsequently, in 1916, the Goes Lithographing Company brought this suit and procured a judgment for the amount of its claim against the La Salle Opera House Company. Whereupon the La Salle Amusement Company was brought into the case as garnishee, and duly made answer to the interrogations that were filed.

It was stipulated that if the trial court found in favor of the Goes Lithographing Company, the court might render a judgment against the La Salle Amusement Company, the garnishee, for the amount of the Goes Lithographing Company’s judgment claim, instead of entering judgment against the La Salle Amusement Company, requiring it to deliver to the bailiff of the Municipal Court all the personal property, fixtures and furniture purchased by the La Salle Amusement Company from the La Salle Opera House Company, which personal property, fixtures and furniture were admitted to be worth upwards of the amount of the claim of the Goes Lithographing Company.

When the plaintiff rested, the defendant, garnishee, offered no evidence but moved the court to enter a finding discharging the garnishee “for the reason that all of the personal property, fixtures and furniture so purchased by the La Salle Amusement Company from the La Salle Opera House Company is not subject to garnishment, and (the sale) is not in violation of the Bulk Sales Act of the State of Illinois.” This motion was overruled and the judgment appealed from was entered.

The principal question presented by this appeal is whether a sale of all the goods and chattels and other property owned by a corporation and used by it in operating a theatre is within the provisions and purview of the Bulk Sales’ Act of 1913, and, under the terms of that act, void as to the vendor’s creditors, unless its provisions are complied with. If it is, such goods and chattels are subject to garnishment in the hands of the vendee, at the suit of the vendor’s creditors, or any of them (Rev. St. Ill. ch. 62, sec. 20, J. & A. ¶ 5955), for as to such creditors they would be considered as still belonging to the vendor. Cohn v. Malo, 198 Ill. App. 538.

Section 1 of the Bulk Sales Act of 1913 [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶ 10021(1)] provides:

“That the sale, transfer, or assignment in bulk of the major part or the whole of a stock of merchandise, or merchandise and fixtures or other goods and chattels of the vendor’s business, otherwise than in the ordinary course of trade and in the regular and usual prosecution of the vendor’s business shall be fraudulent and void as against the creditors of the said vendor, unless ’ ’ certain requirements as to notice of such sale, to the vendor’s creditors, he complied with. Rev. St. Ill. ch. 121a, sec. 1.

It is the contention of the appellant, La Salle Amusement Company, that, by the application of the familiar rule of ejusdem generis, the general words of the statute, “or other goods and chattels of the vendor’s business,” must be construed to include only things of the same kind as indicated by the particular and specific words, “stock of merchandise, or merchandise and fixtures.” It is further contended that in referring to “other goods and chattels of the vendor’s business,” and in declaring a bulk sale of the major part or the whole of such goods and chattels, void as to the vendor’s creditors unless the requirements of the statute are complied with, wherever such sale is “otherwise than in the ordinary course of trade and in the regular and usual prosecution of the vendor’s business,” the General Assembly intended that the act should be considered as applying only to a bulk sale of such goods and chattels as, “in the ordinary course of trade and in the regular and usual prosecution of the vendor’s business,” were the subject of sale other than in bulk. In other words, it is appellant’s contention that unless the ordinary and usual prosecution of the vendor’s business involves sales of such goods and chattels in lesser quantities, the statute can have no application to a sale of those goods and chattels in bulk, and that therefore a stock of merchandise or similar commodities must be involved in the sale, to bring it within the Bulk Sales Act of 1913. As the vendor in the case at bar did not deal in merchandise or in any commodity, and inasmuch as the goods and chattels involved here were never the subject of sale in lesser quantities or in any way, “in the ordinary course of trade and in the regular and usual prosecution of the vendor’s business,” which was that of conducting a theatre, it is appellant’s contention that the act can have no application to a bulk sale of those goods and chattels.

In support of this position, appellant has called our attention to a number of decisions in other jurisdictions construing' statutes similar to ours and also to the cases of Heslop v. Golden, 189 Ill. App. 388; H. S. Richardson Coal Co. v. Cermak, 190 Ill. App. 106, and Larson v. Judd, 200 Ill. App. 420, construing the statute involved here. ■ '

The last case cited is not in point, inasmuch as the court there came to its decision solely on the ground that the sale involved was not such as could be considered a bulk sale, but rather one including a comparatively small part of the vendor’s goods and chattels. In the case of Heslop v. Golden, supra, the court held that the sale of all his office furniture, by one conducting an employment agency, was not within the statute, construing the words 1 other goods and chattels of the vendor’s business” to mean only such goods and chattels as were “used in connection with the business of selling merchandise, commodities or other wares.” In the case of H. S. Richardson Coal Co. v. Cermak, supra, the court held that a sale of a double team of horses including harness and wagon, which the vendor had been personally using to haul coal for others, at a compensation of so much per ton, was not within the statute. The court there held, that the statute must be presumed to relate to a business or trade, where, in the ordinary course and regular prosecution thereof, the goods or chattels, whatever they might consist of, are not ordinarily and regularly sold by the owner in bulk.

As against these cases may be cited the case of Page v. Wright, 194 Ill. App. 149; and Athon v. McAllister, 205 Ill. App. 41. In the former case the sale of a livery stock, including an automobile, a gasoline engine, lighting plant and oil tank, was held to be void for noncompliance with the Bulk Sales Law. In the latter ease a sale of certain office furniture, horses, colts, wagons, trucks, drays, harness, farm machinery, hogs, pigs, growing corn and the like, by one engaged in the dray and transfer business and in farming, all of which property had been used or produced in one or the other of these businesses, was held to be within the provisions of the Bulk Sales Law and void because of noncompliance therewith.

We agree entirely with the decision of the court, in the last case cited, to the effect that our Supreme Court, in the interpretation it has given this act, has said that the act cannot be given the narrow construction here contended for, but must be considered as comprehending and applying to all bullí sales of any kind of “goods and chattels of the vendor’s business,” if such sale is “otherwise than in the ordinary course of trade and in the regular and usual prosecution of the vendor’s business.”

Our General Assembly passed a Bulk Sales Act in 1905. That act was limited, in its operation, to so-called bulk sales of a “stock of merchandise.” Our Supreme Court held this act to be unconstitutional in Charles J. Off & Co. v. Morehead, 235 Ill. 40. The court there said that the words “stock of merchandise” as used in that act, were equivalent to “stock in trade,” and that the statute was limited in its application to stocks of goods such as were kept for sale by merchants and tradesmen in the ordinary course of their business. The court pointed out that the statute had no application “to a sale by a manufacturer of all his machinery, tools, finished articles and raw material; or by a farmer of all his live stock, farm implements, crops, grown or growing, and household goods; or by a hotelkeeper of his entire business and all the property therein” (and the court might have added the illustration of a sale by a proprietor and owner of a theatre, of his entire business and all the property therein).; “or by a livery or transfer company of all its rolling stock, harness and horses owned and used in the business; or by a publisher of all his presses, printing machinery and appliances; or by a mine owner of all the property owned and used in the mining business; or to a sale by a miller who may sell his business, mill machinery and the grain and its products on hand.” The court called attention to the fact that as to these and all other sales, except of stocks of merchandise, “the law indulges the presumption of honesty and fair intentions * * *, either in or out of the ordinary course of business, with or without an inventory, and in bulk or by parts and parcels.” The court said that there was no common disability, attribute or qualification connected with a stock of merchandise, or in respect to the persons dealing in the same, which would warrant the legislature in marking the same for special protective legislation from which all other classes of persons and of goods and chattels were excluded. Inasmuch as the act there under consideration was construed to have that effect, the Supreme Court held it to be special class legislation and therefore unconstitutional and void.

The construction of the Act of 1913, for which appellant here contends, is precisely that which our Supreme Court gave to the Act of 1905, and as a result of which they declared it to be unconstitutional. That we are bound not to give such a construction to the Act of 1913 follows’ from the fact that the Supreme Court has had occasion to construe that act also and pass upon its constitutionality, and has held that it does not contain the defects which that court previously pointed out in passing upon the former act, and that the later act is constitutional. In so holding in G. S. Johnson Co. v. Beloosky, 263 Ill. 363, the Supreme Court points out that section 1 of the later Act includes within its terms, “the sale, transfer, or assignment * * * of a stock of merchandise, or merchandise and fixtures or other goods and chattels of the vendor’s business,” and the court further points out that “thereafter in said section the property, the sale of which is affected by said act, is referred to as ‘said goods and chattels. ’ In section 2 of the new Act [Callaghan’s 1916 St. Supp. ¶ 10021(2)] the same language is used in reference to the property, the sale, transfer or assignment of which is affected by the act.” The court then proceeds as follows: “It must be assumed that the legislature, in passing the new act, had before it the decision of this court holding the former act unconstitutional because it was special class legislation, and that it was the intention of the General Assembly, in passing the later act, to obviate this objection by passing a general act applicable indiscriminately to the sale of a/ny goods and chattels in the manner inhibited by section 1 of that Act. Construing the new act as a general law which prohibits the sale of any goods and chattels in bulk, otherwise than in the ordinary course of trade in the regular and usual prosecution of business, the objection to which the former statute was open is obviated.” The sale in question in that case involved the entire stock in trade, store fixtures and the wagon and team used in connection with the vendor’s bakery business. In view of these decisions by the Supreme Court, we hold that the Bulk Sales Act of 1913 applies to the sale of the personal property, fixtures and furniture covered by the bill of sale involved in the case at bar. The unreasonableness of the law as so construed, which appellant has urged upon our consideration, whether or not it exists, is, as the Supreme Court has pointed out in the case last cited, a legislative question, with which we may not concern ourselves.

Two further questions remain to be passed upon. Appellant contends that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed because the record fails to show by any evidence that the requirements of section 1 of the Garnishment Act (J. & A. ¶ 5936), as to the issuance of execution and the return thereof “no property found,” were complied with.

There are two reasons why this question cannot be urged now. Appellant is raising it here for the first time. At the conclusion of the evidence, it moved the court to discharge- the garnishee, not for the reason now urged, namely, that there was a failure of proof as to the issuance of execution and its return as required by the Garnishment Act, but for the rea,son that the property in question was not subject to garnishment and the sale not within the Bulk Sales Act. The point urged now by appellant was thereby waived by it so far as this appeal is concerned. Further, the bill of exceptions contains no recital that it includes all the evidence in the case. We are thereof ore obliged to presume that, so far as the evidence is concerned, there was sufficient to authorize the court’s finding.

It is appellant’s further contention that in the possession of the vendor, the La Salle Opera House Company, the personal property, fixtures and furniture in question were subject to existing valid liens, which would have exhausted its full value, hence there was nothing’ reachable for the benefit of appellee, either by execution or otherwise. This sale was not void under the terms of the statute, as between the vendor and vendee, but as between them it was valid. As a result of that sale the lien and mortgage creditors have ceased to exist for they were paid in full-by the vendor of the property, with the money realized from the sale. But in adjudicating the rights of this appellee, who remains a creditor of the vendor, we are obliged to hold that, so far as appellee is concerned, the sale was void for the reasons heretofore given, and appellee may reach such goods and chattels in the hands of the vendee, by garnishment proceedings. Cohn v. Malo, 198 Ill. App. 538. Appellee is entitled to have its claim satisfied out of the personal property, fixtures and furniture, as such goods and chattels exist when reached by it in the hands of the garnishee, hy means of garnishment proceedings.

For the reasons stated the judgment of the Municipal Court will he affirmed.

Affirmed.


author: Mr. Justice Thompson

text:
    Third District.
    C. S. Schneider and R. L. Schneider, partners, appellants, v. Albert F. Stearns, appellee.
    Assumpsit to recover for services as attorneys. Tender of $200 by defendant and judgment for plaintiffs on verdict for that amount. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Ford county; the Hon. Thomas M. Harris, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 14, 1917.
    O. B. Dobbins, for appellants.
    G.. E. Beach, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Fred R. Bell, appellant, v. H. R. McDonald, appellee.
    Judgment by confession on note; judgment opened and on trial verdict and judgment rendered for defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion county; the Hon. John H. Marshall, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    M. F. Keegan and Walter T. Gunn, for appellant.
    Crayton & Boyle for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Dora E. Singleton, administratrix, appellee, v. Peoria & Eastern Railway Company, appellant.
    Action to recover for wrongful death of person struck by train at street crossing. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion county; the Hon. John H. Marshall, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1917.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    George B. Gillespie, for appellant; Reariek & Meeks and F. L. Littleton, of counsel.
    C. H. Beckwith and Thomas A. Graham, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Max Boydston, plaintiff in error.
    Conviction on charge of wife abandonment. Error to the County Court of Morgan county; the Hon. William E. Thompson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.

      Worthington, Reeve & Green, for plaintiff in error; Marsh & Martin, of counsel.
    Carl E. Robinson, for defendant in error; J. O. Priest, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Ray O. Ludwick, plaintiff in error.
    Conviction on charge of selling liquor in anti-saloon territory. Error to the County Court of Champaign county; the Hon. Roy C. Freeman, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    F. T. Carson and A. J. Miller, for plaintiff in error.
    Louis A. Busch and H. D. Roth, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Lester Blackwelder, defendant in error, v. William J. Jackson, receiver of Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad Company, plaintiff in error.
    Action to recover for expulsion from a passenger train and for personal injuries alleged to have been then sustained. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Circuit Court of Montgomery county; the Hon. William B. Wright, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Hill & Buffington, for plaintiff in error; H. T. Dick, of counsel.
    J. Earl Major and Edward C. Kaburick, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    George W. Rosebraugh, conservator of Lulu Sizemore, appellant, v. Charleston State Bank and Fred G. Hudson, trustee, appellees.
    Bill to obtain construction of a mortgage as to the disposition of a fund in the hands of a trustee. Decree against complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Coles county; the Hon. Augustus A. Partlow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    T. N. Gofer, for appellant.
    Albert C. and Ben F. Anderson, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John H. Powers, appellee, v. Estate of Mary Ellen Murray, deceased, appellant.
    Claim against estate based on notes. Judgment against estate on appeal from Probate Court. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Vermilion county; the Hon. Augustus A. Partlow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Bindley, Penwell & Bindley, for appellant; Walter C. Bindley; of counsel.
    Swallow & Bookwálter, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Childers & Lillienstein, appellee, v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, appellant.
    Action to recover damages for injury to horses in course of transportation. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. Elbert S. Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Graham & Graham, for appellant; John G. Drennan, of counsel.
    John G. Priedmeyer, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    E. B. Conover et al., trading as E. B. Conover Grain Company, for use of Chatham Elevator Company, appellees, v. Chicago & Alton Railroad Company, appellant.
    Action to recover damages for negligence in transporting a carload of corn. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. Prank W. Burton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Graham & Graham, for appellant; Edward Barton and Charles R. Webber, of counsel.
    H. L. Child, for appellees; Wilson, Warren & Child, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Chatham Elevator Company, appellee, v. Chicago & Alton Railroad Company, appellant.
    Action to recover damages for negligence in transporting corn. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. Prank W. Burton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Graham & Graham, for appellant; Edward Barton and Charles R. Webber, of counsel.
    H. L. Child, for appellee; Wilson, Warren & Child, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Thelia Vilitis, appellee, v. Adam Hoff and J. D. Huber, appellants.
    Action for trespass based on injuries received in resisting execution of a writ of replevin. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. Elbert S. Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    W. W. Shelley and J. T. Garretson, for appellants.
    John G. Priedmeyer, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In re estate of John Warner, deceased. Isabella R. Warner et al., appellants, v. Vespasian Warner, executor, appellee.
    Order fixing fees of attorneys employed by executor. Appeal by heirs from the Circuit Court of De Witt county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917. Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Herrick & Herrick, Underwood & Smyser, Pred Ball and Leonard W. Ingham, for appellants; L. R. Herrick and Charles R. Young, of counsel.
    L. O. Williams and Prank K. Lemon, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John McLaughlin, appellee, v. Chicago-Springfield Coal Company, appellant.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by an assistant cage man in a mine, caused by one of a trip of ears tipping over on him. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. Elbert S. Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Beversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Timothy McGrath, for appellant.
    A. M. Fitzgerald, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    David Shute, appellant, v. Thomas Gillogly, Charles E. Miller and G. E. A. Salmans, appellees.
    Action to recover for fraud involving exchange of real estate. Judgment in favor of two of defendants and against the third. Appeal by plaintiff from the Circuit Court of Douglas county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Rehearing denied and opinion modified and refiled July 2, 1918.
    S. S. Du Hamel and Dobbins & Dobbins, for appellant.
    W. Thomas Coleman, W. W. Beeves and John H. Chadwick, for appellee Gillogly. Lindley, Penwell & Lindley, for appellee Miller; Walter O. Lindley, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Hissong, appellant, v. Arthur Willard, appellee.
    Action to recover for damage to buggy, etc., and medical treatment of wife due to collision with defendant’s automobile. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Champaign county; the Hon. Franklin H. Boggs, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Beversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Little & Finfrock and O. B. Dobbins, for appellant.
    Green & Palmer and Frank T. Carson, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Kate Hissong, appellee, v. Arthur Willard, appellant.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained in a collision between defendant’s automobile and a buggy in which plaintiff was riding. Judgment against defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Champaign county; the Hon. Franklin H. Boggs, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Beversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Green & Palmer and Frank T. Carson, for appellant.
    Little & Finfrock and O. B. Dobbins, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    M. J. Bartel, appellee, v. Mary R. Zimmerman et al., appellants.
    Bill to subject realty to the payment of a judgment and to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. Elbert S. Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Beversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1918.
    Graham & Graham and George M. Morgan, for appellants.
    John G. Friedmeyer, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Thompson

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

text:
    Virginia Gise, plaintiff in error, v. A. M. Hewitt et al., defendants in error.
    Assumpsit on two promissory notes. Judgment for defendant on a directed verdict on defense of want- of consideration. Error to the Circuit Court of Christian county; the Hon. William B. Wright, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    G. Fred Bush and John E. Hogan, for plaintiff in error.
    George T. Wallace and W. B. McBride, for defendants in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frank Dick et al., appellants, v. M. F. Ambrosius, executor of the last will and testament of Addie Dick, deceased, et al., appellees.
    Bill to contest a will. Judgment for defendants. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cass county; the Hon. Harry Higbee, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    W. H. Dieterich, for appellants; J. M. Biggs, of counsel.
    Hardin W. Masters and Thomas D. Masters, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Pearl Luther, appellee, v. C. C. Bowman et al., appellants.
    Judgment for plaintiff on a judgment note following opening of judgment by confession. Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Sain Welty, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 2, 1918.
    James L. Loar and Sterling, Livingston & Whitmore, for appellants.
    DeMange, Gillespie & DeMange, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Farmington Horse Company, plaintiff in error, v. Estate of Andrew J. Jacobus, deceased, defendant in error.
    Claim against estate of decedent for value of property destroyed while in possession of decedent. Judgment for defendant. Error to the Circuit 'Court of Fulton county; the Hon. Harry M. Waggoner, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917. Waggoner, J., took no part in the decision of this case.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    W. S. Jewell, Cameron & Cameron and Alphon L. Anderson, for plaintiff in error.
    Chiperfield & Chiperfield, for defendant in 'error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Frank Rudolph, plaintiff in error.
    Conviction for encouraging female child to become delinquent on information containing no direct averment that child became delinquent. Error to the County Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. J. B. Weaver, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    A. Morris Williams, for plaintiff in error; Roy M. Seeley and John M. Pfeifer, of counsel.
    C. F. Mortimer, for defendant in error; Oscar J. Putting and John P. Snigg, Jr., of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Jasper Davis, plaintiff in error.
    Conviction on charge of selling liquor in anti-saloon territory. Error to the County Court of Champaign county; the Hon. Roy C. Preeman, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    P. T. Carson, for plaintiff in error.
    Louis A. Busch and H. D. Roth, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. William Humble, plaintiff in error.
    Conviction on charge of assault with a deadly weapon. Error to the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Sain Welty, Judge,presiding. Hearijl in this court at the April term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Prank Gillespie, for plaintiff in error.
    Miles K. Young and W. B. Leach, for defendant in error; W. W. Whitmore, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. C. S. Welch et al., plaintiff in error, v. Moultrie County, Illinois, et al., defendants in error.
    Mandamus to compel adjoining county to appropriate money for the construction of a bridge over a county line stream. Special demurrer to petition sustained. Error to the Circuit Court of Moultrie county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Whitaker, Ward & Pugh, for plaintiff in error.
    J. L. McLaughlin, J. K. Martin and Paul Heineke, for defendants in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    A. M. Hewitt, administrator of the estate of Nancy F. Hewitt, plaintiff in error, v. Lydia A. Haines and Fletcher Haines, defendants in error.
    Bill for accounting growing out of case of Haines v. Newitt, 129 Ill. 347. Bill dismissed on ground of laches. Error to the Circuit Court of Christian county; the Hon. William B. Wright, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    W. B. McBride and George T. Wallace, for plaintiff in error.
    Taylor & Taylor, for defendants in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    William E. Young et al., appellants, v. Emma Smith et al., appellees.
    Bill to have deed declared a mortgage. Dismissed for want of equity. Appeal from the Cireuit Court of Douglas county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Rehearing denied and opinion modified October 2, 1918.
    S. S. Duhamel, for appellants.
    Marion Watson, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    George E. Clark, plaintiff in error, v. Directors of School District No. 38, Cass County, Illinois, defendants in error.
    Action by a school-teacher to recover salary after discharge before expiration of term. Judgment for defendants. Error to the Cireuit Court of Cass county; the Hon. Harry Higbee, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Hardin W. Masters, for plaintiff in error.
    Lloyd M. McClure, for defendants in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Orvil F. Hopper, appellee, v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, appellant.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained in collision between an automobile and a switch engine. Judgment for plaintiff for $1,184. Appeal from the Cireuit Court of Vermilion county; the Hon. Augustus A. Partlow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 2, 1918.
    George B. Gillespie, for appellant; Reariek &' Meeks and F. L. Littleton, of counsel.
    A. B. Dennis and Acton & Acton, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Joseph Schingel, Jr., appellant, v. M. S. Plaut and A. E. Plaut, executors of last will and testament of S. Plaut, deceased, appellees.
    Assumpsit to recover balance due upon a building contract. Judgment against plaintiff on sustaining special demurrer to amended special count. Appeal from the Cireuit Court of Vermilion county; the Hon. Walter Brewer, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    F. L. Draper and C. R. Shannon, for appellant.
    Swallow & Book-waiter, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Dollie Smith, appellee, v. Peter Jacobs et al., trustees of Firemen’s Pension Fund of City of Springfield, Illinois, appellants.
    Mandamus to compel payment of pension for death of fireman from typhoid fever claimed to have been contracted while occupying engine house. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Cireuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. Norman L. Jones, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    'Roy M. Seeley, for appellants.
    A. M. Fitzgerald, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Fred W. Potter, insurance superintendent of State of Illinois, v. Northern Life Insurance Company. Federal Life Insurance Company, appellant, v. Sangamon Loan & Trust Company, receiver, appellee.
    Petition in intervention to compel receiver to make good certain certificates of deposit'transferred to petitioner under a contract with the receiver. Cross-bill to obtain a construction of the contract and for an accounting. Decree for defendant on cross-bill. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    C. A. Atkinson and Allen, Humphrey & Converse, for appellant.
    A. M. Fitzgerald, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    W. B. Otto and Edward Axford, appellees, v. George Purcell, appellant.
    Assumpsit to recover for breach of warranty in sale of stallions, one of which was found a “cribber” and the other ineligible for registration. Judgment for plaintiffs. Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Sain Welty, Judge,- presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Sterling, Livingston & Whitmore, for appellant.
    DeMange, Gillespie & DeMange, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Delia L. Stadler, plaintiff in error, v. Estate of John Stadler, defendant in error.
    Petition for widow’s award following acceptance of will and waiver of “rights as to homestead, dower and widow’s award.” Judgment against petitioner on appeal from! County to Circuit Court. Error to the Circuit Court of Macoupin county; the Hon. Frank W. Burton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Carey E. Barnes, for plaintiff in error.
    Alexander H. Bell, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    E. J. Landgraff, appellant, v. Fred A. Williams, appellee.
    Bill for accounting and dissolution of partnership, cross-bill by defendant. Original bill and cross-bill dismissed for want of equity. Appeal from the Circuit Court of De Witt county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    W. E. Sampson and E. B. Mitchell, for appellant.
    F. K. Lemon, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Elliner Webster, appellee, v. L. E. Shafer, appellant.
    Judgment by confession on a judgment note. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Champaign county; the Hon. Franklin H. Boggs, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.

      Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Dobbins & Dobbins, for appellant.
    Roy R. Cline, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Robert A. Bower, Jr., executor of the estate of John Thrash, deceased, appellant, v. Perry Thrash, appellee.
    Trover to recover amount of note claimed by defendant to have been returned to him by payee as a gift. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Champaign county; the Hon. Franklin H. Boggs, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Reversed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Frank T. Carson and Green & Palmer, for appellant; Henry I. Green and William G. Palmer, of counsel.
    Frank E. Williamson and Dobbins & Dobbins, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Rosie Ruckman, appellee, v. W. C. Ruckman, appellant.
    Suit for separate maintenance. Decree for complainant for $500 solicitor’s fees and $125 per month for support. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Piatt county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    C. W. Firke and J. L. Hicks, for appellant.
    Herrick & Herrick, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    William Garris and Robert L. Leggett, appellees, v. School Directors of School District No. 5, County of De Witt and State of Illinois, appellants.
    Bill to restrain construction of sehoolhouse on ground that no legal'election was held on insurance of bonds. Decree for complainants. Appeal from the Circuit Court of De Witt county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.'
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    W. F. Gray, for appellants.
    Herrick & Herrick, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frank T. Moloney, trustee, and the State National Bank of Mattoon, Illinois, appellants, v. Charles E. Lindley, appellee.
    Bill to foreclose mortgage, containing wrong township number in description, against subsequent purchaser of land without notice. Bill dismissed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cumberland county; the Hon. Walter Brewer, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the June term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Bryan H. Tivnen, for appellants.
    Lindley, Penwell & Lindley, for appellee; Walter C. Lindley, of éounsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. James Bracken, plaintiff in error.
    Conviction on charge of selling liquor in anti-saloon territory. Error to the Circuit Court of Vermilion county; the Hon. Walter Brewer, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Dwyer & Dwyer, for plaintiff in error.
    John H. Lewman, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Per Curiam.

text:
    Walter Wilson, defendant in error, v. William Black, plaintiff in error.
    Action for breach of warranty in the sale of a horse warranted sound but found to be a “dummy.” Judgment for plaintiff for $100. Error to the Circuit Court of Moultrie county; the Hon. George A. Sentel, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    .Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Jack & Boggess, for plaintiff in error.
    J. L. McLaughlin and Paul Heineke, for defendant in error.
   Per Curiam.


text:
    Upton L. Renshaw, appellant, v. H. M. Griswold and J. E. Armstrong, appellees.
    Replevin suit dismissed on motion of plaintiff. Judgment for defendants for $306.50, or in alternative return of replevied property. Motion to vacate judgment denied. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. E. S. Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    H. W. Masters, for appellant.
    Charles G. Briggle, for appellees.
   Per Curiam.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Joseph M. Moses, plaintiff in error.
    Conviction on prosecution for conspiracy to obtain money by false pretenses. Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county; the Hon. Harry M. Waggoner, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1918. Waggoner, J., took no part in the decision of this case.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    William H. Hartzell, Bert M. Cavanagh and Edward S. Martin, for plaintiff in error.
    Earl W. Wood and Clifton J. O’Harra, for defendant in error.
   Per Curiam.


text:
    Eva M. Harrington, appellant, v. Joseph Quigley, appellee.
    Assumpsit to recover wages as servant. Motion for judgment by default for failure to file a sufficient affidavit of merits denied, and suit dismissed upon plaintiff’s refusal to plead further. No final judgment entered on dismissal. Appeal from the City Court of Canton; the Hon. Harry C. Moran, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1918.
    Appeal dismissed.
    Opinion filed July 15, 1918.
    Max Borchardt and James P. Cook, for appellant.
    Burnett M. Chiperfield and Claude E. Ghiperfield, for appellee; Jesse Black, Jr., of counsel.
   Per Curiam.


author: Mr. Justice Higbee

text:
    Fourth District.
    May Humpler, appellant, v. John Yarbrough, Jr., appellee.
    Action by former wife against her ex-husband to recover for support of children. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Fayette county; the Hon. William B. Wright, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed July 16, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 24, 1918.
    F. M. Guinn, for appellant.
    Albert & Albert and Arthur Roe, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice McBride

text:
    Mary L. Horner, plaintiff in error, v. A. H. Bachmann et al., defendants in error.
    Bill to set aside dissolution of corporation and conveyance of its property and to recover money. Bill dismissed. Error to the Circuit Court of St. Clair county; the Hon. J. F. Gillham, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 16, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 24, 1918.
    Winkelmann & Ogle and R. W. Ropiequet, for plaintiff in error.
    C. E. Chamberlin and Schaefer & Kruger, for defendants in error.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

text:
    Sallie G. Owens, plaintiff in error, v. Charles L. McMackin, defendant in error.
    Action for misuse of legal process in attempting to have plaintiff declared insane. Judgment for defendant. Error to the Circuit Court of Marion county; the Hon. Albert M. Rose, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Sallie G. Owens, pro se.

    Frank F. Noleman and June C. Smith, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Ale Rose, appellee, v. Martha F. Frailey, appellant.
    Action to recover value of corn taken by defendant from land leased by plaintiff from defendant and for value of corn destroyed by latter’s hogs. .Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Hardin county; the Hon. Julius C. Kern, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    W. A. Rittenhouse, Richard' F. Taylor and John C. Oxford, for appellant.
    James E. Denton, James A. Watson and J. Q. A. Led-better, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frank Easley, administrator of the estate of Albert H. Brown, Jr., deceased, defendant in error, v. William J. Jackson, receiver of Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad Company, plaintiff in error.
    Action to recover for death of an infant passenger in automobile struck by train at a highway crossing. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county; the Hon. J. C. Eagleton, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Edward C. Craig, Donald B. Craig, Fred H. Kelly and Holmes & Dillon, for plaintiff in error; Homer T. Dick and Charles O. Fowler, of counsel.
    G. A. Hickman, W. P. Seeber and Hart & Hart, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Ralph McNew, appellee, v. Morris Sternberger, appellant.
    Judgment for plaintiff on appeal from justice court. Appeal from the Circuit Court of St. Clair county; the Hon. J. F. Gillham, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded for failure of appellee to file briefs.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    James O. Miller, for appellant.
    No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    G. E. Rogers, appellee, v. Jared W. Fox and Charles R. Godding, trading as Fox & Godding, appellants.
    Action to recover balance due on contract for sale of apples. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the County Court of Washington county; the Hon. W. P. Green, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    House, Skipper & Watts, for appellants.
    J. Paul Carter and Conrad Schul, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Marion Weshinsky, appellee, v. Chicago-Sandoval Coal Company, appellant.
    Action to recover for personal injuries to miner caused by fall of coal and slate. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Marion county; the Hon. William B. Wright, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Noleman & Smith, for appellant.
    Kagy & Vandervort and Kramer, Kramer & Campbell, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Tony Repsis, appellee, v. Saline County Coal Company, appellant.
    Action to recover for personal injuries to miner caused by fall of rock and slate. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Saline county; the Hon. A. W. Lewis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Miley & Combe and A. E. Somers, for appellant; Warren Nichols, of counsel.
    Lewis, Ronalds & Lewis, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    W. J. Simer, administrator of the estate of Charles Simer, deceased, appellee, v. Earl J. Hults, appellant.
    Replevin. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Marion county; the Hon. William B. Wright, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Noleman & Smith and Earl C. Huggins, for appellant.
    Kagy & Vandervort, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion" of the court.


text:
    Mary E. Hill, appellee, v. Prennie A. Gash et al., appellants.
    Action of forcible detainer. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Wayne county; the Hon. Charles H. Miller, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Boggs & Boggs, for appellants.
    Cooper & Burgess and Mills & Forth, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Ben Clark, appellee, v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, appellant.
    Action to recover for personal injuries caused by fall of timbers from passing freight train while plaintiff was on station platform. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Saline county; the Hon. A. W. Lewis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    AfSrmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    P. J. Kolb and W. F. Scott, for appellant; L. J. Hackney and Frank L. Littleton, of counsel.
    Gustin, Lightfoot & Gustin and Fowler & Rumsey, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Maggie M. Becker, appellee, v. John L. Becker, appellant.
    Bill for divorce on ground of extreme and repeated cruelty. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Fayette county; the Hon. James C. McBride, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918. McBride, J., took no part in the hearing of this case.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Brown & Burnside and Le Forgee, Black & Samuels, for appellant.
    Albert & Albert, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Christ Miofski et al., appellants, v. Ziso Dimitroff et al., appellees.
    Bill to determine interest in land under a contract, and to have a deed declared a mortgage. Bill dismissed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. Louis Bernreuter, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Willis H. Clark and A. R. Johnson, for appellants.
    Warnock, Williamson & Burroughs, for appellees Bethmann, St. Louis Brewing Ass in and Niemann.
   Mr. Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. W. O. Warren, plaintiff in error.
    Judgment for plaintiff for $25. Error to the Circuit Court of Clinton county; the Hon. Thomas M. Jett, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded for failure of defendant in error to file a brief.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Johnston & Johnston and Kramer, Kramer & Campbell, for plaintiff in error.
    No appearance for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Town of Omphghent, appellee, v. Henry Gusewelle, appellant.
    Action to recover a penalty for obstructing a highway. Judgment against defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. J. F. Gillham, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Keefe, Hadley & Baxter, for appellant.
    Terry, Gueltic & Powell, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Joe Moreen, defendant in error, v. William C. Niblack, trustee in bankruptcy for O’Gara Coal Company, bankrupt, plaintiff in error.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by miner caused by fall of slate. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Circuit Court of Saline county; the Hon. A. W. Lewis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Miley & Combe, for plaintiff in error.
    Fowler & Rumsey and W. C. Kane, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John R. Gage, administrator of the estate of Thomas E. Gage, deceased, appellee, v. City of Vienna, Illinois, appellant.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Johnson county; the Hon. A. W. Lewis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed on striking bill of exceptions for not having been filed in time.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    John O. Cowan, Spann & Spann, Cowan & Huffman and Mansfield & Cowan, for appellant.
    O. R. Morgan, C. S. Miller and H. Robert Fowler, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Owensboro Wagon Company, appellant, v. Douglas Tanner, appellee.
    Action on note. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Saline county; the Hon. A. W. Lewis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    Gustin, Lightfoot & Gustin, for appellant; Gifford & Steinfeld, of counsel.
    H. N. Finney, for appellee; R. S. Marsh, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Della Kirk, administratrix of the estate of Robert Kirk, deceased, appellee, v. Federal Coal Company, appellant.
    Action to recover for death of minor caused by shot fired in adjoining room blowing through into room in which deceased had taken refuge. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Williamson county; the Hon. Benjamin W. Pope, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    A. M. Fitzgerald, W. O. Potter and William E. Wheeler, for appellant.
    Neely, Gallimore & Cook, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Troy Russell, appellee, v. Saline County Coal Company, appellant.
    Action by mule driver in mine to recover for personal injuries caused by kick from mule and being run over by moving ear while endeavoring to escape from mule. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Saline county; the Hon. A. W. Lewis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed November 1, 1918.
    A. E. Somers and Miley & Combe, for appellant; Warren Nichols, of counsel.
    Lewis, Ronalds & Lewis, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Dover

text:
    First District.
    James F. Bishop, administrator of the estate of Florence L. Harris, deceased, appellee, v. Lambert C. Wieland et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,025.
    Action to recover for death of child falling from porch because of defective railing. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph B. David, Judge, presiding.' Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 14, 1918.
    Albert R. Gates and William J. Lacey, for appellants.
    James L. Bynum, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dover

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Bird-Sykes Company, appellee, v. Paul W. Schroeder, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,080.
    Action against an accommodation indorser on a note. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh J. Kearns, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Rathje, Wesemann & Van Sehaiek, for appellant.
    Osborne, Cloud & Kline, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dover

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Dever

text:
    R. L. Hurlburt and Frank Koepke, appellees, v. Louis F. Hopkins and George K. Hollingsworth, appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,090.
    Action by a real estate broker to recover commissions. Judgment for plaintiffs. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh J. Kearns, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 14, 1918.
    Charles R. Napier, for appellants.
    Samuels & Samuels, for appellees.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Koehring Machine Company, appellant, v. Aetna Accident & Liability Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 24,100.
    Action against surety on a contractor’s bond to recover on notes given for part of purchase price of machine used in construction work. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Wells M. Cook, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Petition for rehearing stricken October 14, 1918.
    Moses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for appellant; Joseph W. Moses, of counsel.
    Dent, Dobyns & Freeman, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    James F. Bishop, administrator of the estate of Angelo Zorzi, deceased, appellant, v. The Pullman Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 24,188.
    Judgment for defendant on plea in abatement for variance between summons and declaration after refusal to permit amendment of summons. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. M. L. McKinley, Judge presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Charles Cheney Hyde, Ira Edward Westbrook and Charles H. Watson, for appellant.
    Francis B. Daniels, Howard T. Wileoxon and Charles S. Williston, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Colonial Trust & Savings Bank, appellant, v. G. H. Coney, trading as G. H. Coney & Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 24,215.
    Action for conversion of securities. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hosea W. Wells, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Underwood & Smyser and George A. Trude, for appellant; Ben. B. Kahane and Charles R. Young, of counsel.
    Mayer, Meyer, Austrian & Platt, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Mildred Brown, by George Brown, appellee, v. City of Chicago, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,253.
    Action to recover for personal injuries to a child, sustained while using a public sidewalk. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph B. David, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Samuel A. Ettelson and William H. Devenish, for appellant; Robert H. Farrell, of counsel.
    Francis J. Woolley, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    George Hemstead, appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,290.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained in falling from step of moving street ear. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed on remittitur; otherwise reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Philip Rosenthal and Watson J. Ferry, for appellants; J. R. Guilliams and W. W. Gurley, of counsel.
    Charles C. Spencer and Arthur A. House, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Holdom

text:
    Charles Fritz, appellee, v. F. W. Hochspeier Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 23,651.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by a passenger in hired automobile colliding with street car. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Marcus A. Kavanagh, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Robert J. Folonie and W. J. Weldon, for appellant.
    Oscar C. Miller, for appellee; Munson T. Case, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Charles Fritz, plaintiff in error, v. Chicago Railways Company and F. W. Hochspeier Company et al., defendants in error.
    Gen. No. 23,585.
    Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Marcus A. Kavanagh, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed on decision in Fritz v. F. W. Hochspeier Co., supra.

    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Osear C. Miller, for plaintiff in error; Munson T. Case, of counsel.
    Wilkerson, Cassels & Potter, for defendant in error August Hinze; Ralph F. Potter, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    George Eberspacher, appellee, v. F. W. Hochspeier Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 23,652.
    Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Marcus A. Kavanagh, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed on decision in Fritz v. F. W. Hochspeier Co., supra.

    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 14, 1918.
    Robert J. Folonie and W. J. Weldon, for appellant.
    Oscar C. Miller, for appellee; Munson T. Case, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    George Eberspacher, plaintiff in error, v. Chicago Railways Company et al., defendants in error.
    Gen. No. 23,584.
    Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Marcus A. Kavanagh, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed on decision in Fritz v. F. W. Hoch’speier Co., supra, p. 648.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Osear C. Miller, for plaintiff in error; Munson T. Case, of counsel.
    Wilkerson, Cassels & Potter, for defendant in error August Hinze; Ralph F. Potter, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frank Glombicki, appellee, v. Chicago Packing Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,094.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained- by customer falling down elevator shaft. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918. Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Mayer, Meyer, Austrian & Platt and Thomas C. Angerstein, for appellant.
    Francis X. Busch, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Stack Advertising Agency, appellee, v. John Church Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,116.
    Action to recover for services under advertising contract canceled by defendant. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh J. Kearns, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918. Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Church & McMurdy and Howard M. Harpel, for appellant.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw, for appellee; George A. Kelly, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Continental Oil Products Company, appellant, v. Union Petroleum Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 24,125.
    Action to recover for breach of contract for sale of goods. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hosea W. Wells, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Charles Arnd, for appellant.
    Robert C. Wheeler, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Western Express Company, appellee, v. City of Chicago, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,256.
    Action to recover license fees paid under duress under alleged invalid ordinance. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh R. Stewart, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Samuel A. Ettelson, for appellant; George W. Ellis, of counsel.
    John L. Mclnerney, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    National Bank of the Republic of Chicago, appellee, v. John T. Janette and Mamie Janette, appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,270.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Harry P. Dolan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed for insufficiency of abstract.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    L. A. Gilmore, for appellants.
    Frederic A. Fisehel, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice McSurely

text:
    Bertha Haehnlein, plaintiff in error, v. Chicago Railways Company, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 24,056.
    Action by passenger to recover for personal injuries claimed to have been sustained in alighting, by fall of guardrail. Judgment for defendant. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Tatge & Tatge and Robert F. Kolb, for plaintiff in error; Frank Ingraffia, of counsel.
    Joseph D. Ryan and Watson J. Ferry, for defendant in error; W. W. Gurley and J. R. Guilliams, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Ralph C. Hauf and Carrie Hauf, appellants, v. Harold N. Buckley, appellee.
    Gen. No. 24,077.
    Action to recover rent under a lease and damage to premises caused by abandonment. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. J. J. Cooke, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Frederick Peake, for appellants.
    Joseph M. Griffen, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    J. Rayner, appellee, v. Joseph F. Sturdy, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,097.
    Action on note covered by composition agreement. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court - of Chicago; the Hon. Sheridan E. Fry, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and judgment here.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw, for appellant; George A. Kelly, of counsel.
    Either & Goff, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Clarence W. Dunoon and Beulah E. Dunoon, appellees, v. Charles O. Race and Allen A. Parsons, appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,152.
    Trover to recover for conversion of household goods. Judgment for plaintiffs. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Richardson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Reversed and judgment here.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Fred H. Atwood, Charles O. Loucks and Vernon R. Loucks, for appellants; Geary V. Stibgen, of counsel.
    Edward L. England, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Sybil Tucker, administratrix of the estate of Harry G. Tucker, deceased, appellee, v. Carl Mueller and Harry B. McNeal, appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,168.
    Action on note indorsed by defendants. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Martin M. Gridley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 14, 1918.
    Landon & Holt, for appellants; John B. Fruchtl, of counsel.
    Church & McMurdy and Howard M. Harp el, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Myrtle Cleland, appellee, v. Frank Parmelee Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,208.
    Action to recover for loss of personal property while in defendant’s possession for purpose of carriage. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. "William N. Gemmill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed on remittitur; otherwise reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 14, 1918.
    Homer K. Galpin, for appellant.
    Cleland, Lee & Phelps, for appellee; Lester E. Lee, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Chicago Title & Trust Company, v. Martha V. Cottle et al. Martha V. Cottle, appellant, v. Jerome P. Bowes, N. C. Christensen and E. C. Lindquist, trading as Christensen Hardware Company, and Alexander Peterson, appellees.
    Gen. No. 24,231.
    Interpleader to determine ownership of trust deed and notes held by complainant in escrow. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Denis E. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Franklin Raber, for appellant.
    Litsinger, Healy & Reid, for appellees; James J. Finn, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Donald L. Morrill, appellee, v. Chicago Toy Piano Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 24,279.
    Action to recover possession of demised premises and for rent for holding over after expiration of term. Judgment for defendant on issue of possession and for plaintiff for use and occupation. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Courtney, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 1, 1918.
    Rehearing denied October 14, 1918.
    Ernest J. Batten, for appellant.
    Morrill, Shannon & Triska, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    City of Chicago, appellee, v. Adolph Aaronstein, appellant.
    Gen. Nos. 24,454-24,491.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago. Heard in this court at the March term, 1918.
    Affirmed for failure to file record in time.

      Opinion filed October 11, 1918.
    No appearance for appellant.
    Harry B. Miller and Daniel Webster, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.