text:
    The Marseilles Land and Water Power Company, Defendant in Error, v. Timothy L. O’Neil and Mary O’Neil, Plaintiffs in Error. Union Trust Company, Trustee, Defendant in Error.
    Gen. No. 6,781.
    1. Perpetuities, § 1

      —what rule against relates to. The rule against perpetuities relates to the time when title vests, and does not relate to the length of time during which the title may be enjoyed.
    2. Landlord and tenant, § 28*—when leases are supported try consideration. Where each of two leases of water power recites a consideration, contains mutual convenants, the lessees took possession, used the water and paid rent under the lease, and one of them was executed at the same time that the lessor conveyed certain real estate to the lessee, the instruments being consideration for each other, it was held that the leases were supported by consideration.
    3. Landlord and tenant, § 37*—when acknowledgment is not necessary. Leases of water containing a provision for a lien on certain realty to secure the rent under which the lessors and lessees have acted for many years are valid, notwithstanding imperfection in their execution, by reason of failure to have certain parties acknowledge them.
    4. Mortgages, § 49*—when acknowledgment is not necessary. A mortgage is valid between the parties without an acknowledgment, and its recording is notice to subsequent parties.
    5. Waters and watercourses, § 39*—what is effect of defective option to increase water power. Even though the exercise of an option for increasing the water power under a lease of water power is not properly executed or acknowledged, it is sufficient to create liability for the increased rent that the option was acted upon by both parties.
    6. Waters and • watercourses, § 41*—what is effect of condition that may interrupt lease. In a bill to foreclose a lien upon real estate for rent under a lease of water power, the fact that the water power was obtained by a dam across the Illinois river and the lease did not provide against the contingency that the term might be interrupted and destroyed by action of the United States, the State of Illinois or the Sanitary District of Chicago, does not render the lease void where there is no claim that any of such authorities intervened, and the lessee had the use of the right to the water power during all the time for which rent was charged.
    7. Landlord and tenant, § 332

      —when lien is created. On a bill to foreclose certain liens upon real estate for rent due under leases of water power, certain provisions of the leases held to create a lien upon the real estate described therein.
    8. Landlord and tenant, § 352*—when lessor may redeem from foreclosure of lien. The lessor of water power under a lease creating a lien upon certain real estate to secure the payment of the rent may redeem such real estate and have the cost of the redemption included in the decree on the foreclosure of such lien.
    Error to the Circuit Court of La Salle county; the Hon. Edgar Eldredge, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1920.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 29, 1920.
    Peter M. MacArthur, for plaintiffs in error.
    Lester H. Strawn, for defendants in error.
    Timothy L. O’Neil, fro se.

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

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

   Mr. Presiding Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

The Marseilles Land and Water Power Company filed its bill in equity against Timothy L. O’Neil and Mary, his wife, and the Union Trust Company, trustee, to foreclose alleged liens upon certain real estate in the City of Marseilles for rent for water power, and also filed its amended bill, and also a supplemental bill to recover further instalments of said rent. The O’Neils answered, setting up various defenses hereinafter stated. The Union Trust Company, trustee, answered, and filed a7 cross-bill to foreclose a trust deed given by the O’Neils upon said premises. The master in chancery heard and reported the proofs and his conclusions. Objections and exceptions thereto were overruled and there was a decree for complainant in the sum of $9,369.21, and in favor of the cross complainant for $93,403.75, and for the sale of the premises to satisfy said decree. The premises were sold by the master under said decree for $9,723.72, which satisfied the decree in favor of the complainant but left a deficiency decree in favor of the Union Trust Company. The sale was approved. The O’Neils sued out a writ of error from the Supreme Court on October 29,1918, to review said decree. On February 17, 1920, the Supreme Court transferred the cause to this court and it reached this court on March 9, 1920. The abstract filed by plaintiffs in error is so defective that it fails to present many of the. questions argued by them. One of the defendants in error filed an additional abstract. We have concluded to discuss the questions involved so far as they are presented by the two abstracts.

On June 11, 1867, complainant conveyed the real estate in question to John Q. Adams and Oliver E. Adams and at the same time executed a lease to them, known in this record as No. 2. It recited the sale and conveyance -by complainant to said second parties of the real estate involved, to be used for manufacturing purposes requiring the use of machinery to be driven by water power. It leased to said second party and their assigns for 99 years a part of the water power of the first party, 15-horse power, to be taken out of the main channel of complainant at a point most convenient to the premises of the second parties, with an option to increase the water power to 60-horse power. It provided for the constant supply of water, with certain exceptions. It provided how the lease might be extended for consecutive terms of 99 years. The second parties agreed to pay as rent for said water power $150 per annum, and $10 per annum per horse power additional for additional water. It provided that the second parties and their assigns should at all times be liable for the rent whether the water was actually used or not, if the first party was ready and willing to furnish it. It contained the following provision:

“And in order to secure the payment of the rent hereby reserved, it is agreed that the rent due shall at all times be a first and valid lien and encumbrance upon the premises aforesaid in the nature of and to the same extent as a mortgage by deed, and the parties of the second part hereby grant, bargain and encumber the premises aforesaid, with all the improvements and appurtenances thereof, to the first party in mortgage and pledge conditioned only for the faithful payment of the rent herein provided, the same being subject to foreclosure and redemption, and all other rights incident to mortgages of real estate. ’ ’

The lease also provided how the water should be measured. It was filed for record about a month later. Under date of February 15, 1906, complainant executed to the Marseilles Manufacturing Company (called therein “the manufacturer”), which had then become the owner of the real estate described in lease No. 2, a lease (known as No. 17) for 99 years of water sufficient to generate 100-horse power each week day, for which the lessee agreed to pay as rent for the use of said water $1,500 per annum. It contained the following provision:

“The rent shall at all times be a first and valid lien and encumbrance upon the premises of the manufacturer herein described, and upon all improvements, to the same extent as a mortgage by deed, and for the payment thereof the manufacturer does hereby grant, bargain and encumber the premises aforesaid, with all the improvements and appurtenances thereof, to the Water Power Company in mortgage arid pledge, conditioned only for the faithful payment of the rent herein provided, the same being subject to foreclosure and redemption and all other rights incident to mortgages of real estate.”

It contained various other provisions similar in meaning to lease No. 2, and was recorded. By mesne conveyances the title of the lessees became vested in the Swanson Manufacturing Company, and the latter became bankrupt and the real estate in question was sold by a trustee in bankruptcy and purchased by O’Neil. The sale and conveyancé included the lessees’ rights in the two leases above described, and the sale and conveyance was made subject to the liens for rent provided in said leases, and described said leases and the places where recorded. O’Neil paid several instalments of the rent, and afterwards became delinquent and gave to complainant a note for $2,671.22, evidencing the unpaid back rent, which note contained the following provision: “It is the understanding of the parties hereto that this note does not release the mortgage liens provided for in the water leases existing between the parties.” Finally O’Neil became further in default for rent and said note was not paid and he ceased to use the water and this suit was begun.

The O’Neils contend that these leases for 99 years violate the rule against perpetuities. That rule relates to the time when title vests and does not relate to the length of time during which the title may be enjoyed. O’Hare v. Johnston, 273 Ill. 458, 463; Guerin v. Guerin, 270 Ill. 239, 245; Mettler v. Warner, 243 Ill. 600. The O’Neils contend that there was no consideration for either lease. The leases recite a consideration. The first lease was given at the same time as the execution of the deed and those instruments were considerations for each other. The leases contain mutual covenants and they are considerations for each other. The lessees took possession and used the water, and paid rent under said leases. We hold there was a sufficient consideration for the leases. The O’Neils contend that there was some imperfection in the manner of executing these leases by the first party. We hold there was no such imperfection, but if there was, as the lessor and lessees have acted under the leases for many years, they are nevertheless valid. The O’Neils contend that there was a failure to have certain parties acknowledge these leases. A mortgage is valid between the parties without an acknowledgment and its recording is notice to subsequent parties. Semple v. Miles, 3 Ill. (2 Scam.) 315; Roane v. Baker, 120 Ill. 308; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Illinois Central R. Co., 174 Ill. 448; Ogden Building & Loan Ass’n v. Mensch, 196 Ill. 554, 569; Ross v. Harney, 139 Ill. App. 513. The O’Neils contend that the exercise of the option for increasing the water power under lease No. 2 was not properly executed or acknowledged. We hold it sufficient to create liability for the increased rent that the option was acted upon by both parties. O’Neil paid rent thereunder and thereby recognized it. The O’Neils contend that complainant did not furnish at all times the amount of water required. We hold that the evidence is to the contrary. The O’Neils contend that as complainant obtained this water power from the Illinois river by a dam across the same, and as the leases did not provide against the contingency that the term might be interrupted and destroyed by action of the United States or the State of Illinois or the Sanitary District of Chicago, therefore the leases are. void. We hold this position untenable. There is no claim that either of said authorities did intervene, and O’Neil had the use of the premises and the right to this water power during all the time for which rent is charged. The O’Neils contend that the leases did not create a lien upon the real estate described therein. We think that contention is conclusively refuted by the language which we have quoted from said leases. Instances of similar covenants which run with the servient estate and subject the assignor to their performance are found in Fitch v. Johnson, 104 Ill. 111, and Purvis v. Shuman, 273 Ill. 286. The premises were sold for taxes and the complainant redeemed and the cost of the redemption is included in the decree. The O’Neils contend that complainant had no right to redeem from said tax sale or include the amount of that redemption in the decree. The right of a mortgagee to pay taxes assessed against the mortgaged premises and to have such payments' tacked in equity to the mortgage debt upon foreclosure is well established. Boone v. Clark, 129 Ill. 466, 495. The O’Neils contend that there are differences in the description of this real estate in different documents and that they do not describe the same premises, in the absence of explanation. We are of opinion that neither the original nor the additional abstract is sufficient to present this question for our consideration. Some other objections to this record are made. Where they are raised by the abstracts we hold them not well founded.

We find no reversible error in the record. The decree is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: Mr. Presiding Justice Dibell

license: Public Domain

text:
    Village of Downers Grove, Appellee, v. American Surety Company of New York, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 6,798.
    1. Judgment, § 513

      —when order in local improvement proceedings is not res adjudicata. An order of the county court, entered pursuant to section 84 of the Local Improvement Act (J. & A. 1i 1477), determining that' a local improvement has been made in conformity to the requirements of the order is not res adjudicata as to the surety on the contractor’s bond so that he- cannot be held liable on bond where it is discovered after the entry of the order that the work had not been constructed in compliance with ,the requirements of the ordinance.
    2. Judgments, § 401*—what is necessary to make judgment

      res adjudicata. To make a judgment res adjudicata, it must (1) proceed from a court having jurisdiction, (2) be between the same parties, and (3) for the same purpose.
    3. Municipal cobpobations, § 393

      —u>hat is effect of order of county court as to performance. The order provided for by section 84 of the Local Improvement Act (J. & A. jf 1477) as to the conformity of the improvement with the ordinance is solely to determine that question with reference to the special assessment to pay therefor and does not relate to the liability of the contractor and his surety.
    4. Municipal corporations, § 400*—what does not release contractor or surety on bond. Neither the contractor for a local improvement nor the surety on his bond is relieved by the entry of an order under section 84 of the Local Improvement Act (J. & A. 1T 1477), finding that the improvement conformed to the requirements of the ordinance, where it is alleged and the evidence shows that it was discovered after the entry of the order, and that the contractor had fraudulently departed from the requirements without the knowledge of the municipality.
    5. Municipal cobpobations, § 400*—what defenses are not available to surety on contractor’s bond. Semble, that the fact that the contracts let by a municipality for the repair of a local improvement, not performed by the original contractor according to the ordinance, were illegal because not submitted to competitive bidding cannot avail the surety of the original contractor in action on the bond.
    6. Municipal cobpobations, § 383*—when contract need not be let to lowest bidder. Under section 50 of the Local Improvement Act (J. & A. IT 1465) a contract for the repair of a sidewalk let by a village under the commission form of government without advertising for bids is not illegal where all of the commissioners voted to let them.
    7. Appeal and ebbob, § 883*—what is effect of rule requiring instructions in abstract. The reason for the rule of the Appellate Court requiring the abstract to set out in full every instruction given, modified or refused, where complaint is made of rulings on the instructions, is to enable the court, when complaint is made of an instruction given for the- appellee, to examine those given for appellant, to see if the latter embodied the same instruction as that complained of, and, where complaint is made of the refusal of appellant’s instruction, to see, whether the same principle is embodied in other instructions given at his request.
    8. Appeal and ebbob, § 883*—when instructions must be set out in abstract. The ruling of the trial court upon instructions will not be reviewed on appeal unless all of the instructions are set out in the abstract.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Du Page county; the Hon. ■ Mazzini Slusseb, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1920.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 29, 1920.
    Rehearing denied October 12, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Bunge, Harbour & Schmidt, for appellant.
    A. B. Snow and Fisher, Botden, Kales & Bell, for appellee; J. F. Dammann, Jr., of counsel.

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

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

   Mr. Presiding Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

In the spring and summer of 1915 the Village of Downers G-rove, under ordinance No. 49, laid sidewalks on certain streets, to be paid for by special assessment. The contract was duly let to Kent R. Wyllie, who by the contract was required to give a bond for the performance of the contract, and he did give such a bond, executed by himself as principal and by the American Surety Company of New York as surety. The work was completed and accepted by the Board of Local Improvements of said village, and in October, 1915, the county court entered an order finding that the work had been constructed substantially in compliance with the ordinance. During the same time the village also provided for the construction of a sidewalk on another street, under ordinance No. 50, and the contract was let. to the same contractor and he gave a like bond for the performance of that contract, with the same surety, and the work was done and certified in like manner by the Board of Local Improvements, and on the same day in October, 1915, a like order was entered by the county court, finding the work done in substantial compliance with the ordinance. In the following spring it was found,that portions of each of said sidewalks were disintegrating, and this was obviously due to a failure by the contractor to build those portions in conformity to the plans and specifications, for the proof is undisputed that a sidewalk constructed in compliance with the plans and specifications would last from 30 to 50 years. Wyllie seems to have ’ disappeared, and the surety was notified of the condition and called upon to repair the work, and there were interviews and correspondence between the village officers and representatives of the surety company which covered a considerable period of time and ended in a refusal by the surety company to take any action. The village thereupon let several contracts for the repair of various parts of the sidewalk, and brought two actions against the contractor, one upon each bond. There was much special pleading in each case which requires no discussion, as it was stipulated at the trial that defendant could put in any defense which it could properly put in under any plea well pleaded. The two suits were tried together before a jury under an agreement that they should be so tried and that there should be separate verdicts. There was a jury trial and there was a separate verdict in each case for plaintiff for the amount of the debt and assessing the damages. A motion by defendant for a new trial was denied. Two judgments were entered in proper form. A single appeal was prayed and prosecuted by defendant, and this appeal has been treated by appellee as properly prosecuted in that way.

Section 84 of the Local Improvement Act (J. & A. |f 1477) enacts that after the work has been done, it shall be the duty of the Board of Local Improvements to certify to the county court whether the improvement conforms to the requirements of the ordinance and to make application to the county court to determine whether the facts stated in said certificate are true, and thereupon, after public notice, the county court shall hear the application and determine the same in a summary manner, and enter an order according to the facts, which order shall be conclusive upon all the parties, and the statute denies any appeal or writ of error. The chief defense interposed by appellant is that the order of the county court in these two special assessment cases is conclusive that these improvements were completed in compliance with the ordinance, and that that judgment is res judicata in this case, and that the circuit court has no jurisdiction to again try that question. Various cases' are cited where it has been said that such order of the county court is conclusive and that that question cannot again be litigated in the circuit court. Some of these are cases where owners were objecting to the payment of instalments of the assessment because of defective workmanship, and others are cases where the contractor was endeavoring to enforce payment by a suit against the city, where the work had not been formally accepted and the question of its completion had not been submitted to the county court as said statute requires. The statute does not intend that such order of the county court shall be in every respect conclusive upon everybody, for section 83 of the same Act (J. & A. jf 1476) provides that if any property owner shall be injured by any failure to construct such improvement in substantial compliance with the ordinance, he may recover the amount of his injury or pecuniary loss because thereof in an action on the case against the municipality.

It is in part because of such liability that the statute authorizes the municipality to require a bond from the contractor. Said orders of the county court do not constitute res judicata in favor of the surety company, because they do not comply with the rules governing such a defense, as stated in Deke v. Huenkemeier, 289 Ill. 148, on p. 154. It is there said that in order to make a judgment res judicata it must (1) proceed from a court having jurisdiction; (2) be between the same parties; and (3) for the same purpose. The county court had no jurisdiction of the appellant. It could not have entered any order against appellant at that hearing by which the appellant would have been bound. The object of that proceeding was not to determine whether there was any liability on this bond. The purpose of the statute was only to determine that question for the purpose of the special assessment to pay therefor. As already stated, that order did not prevent property owners from afterwards suing the municipality and showing that the work had not in fact been completed according to the ordinance, and that such property owners had been injured thereby. We see no' reason why that order should avail the contractor or his surety. But if the order were available to the surety in a case where the defect, if any, was obvious and known’ at the time the county court entered the order, that should not avail appellant here. The amended declaration in each case charged at great length that at the time said order was entered it was a fact, not known to the village or its agents or representatives, that the work had not been performed in compliance with the ordinance, bid, contract and specifications, but was defective in certain latent conditions which could not have been known to the village or its agents or representatives in the exercise of ordinary care; that said latent defects did not become apparent until the spring and summer of 1916, when portions of said sidewalks began to crumble, grow spongy and loose and disintegrate and expose the subsurface of said sidewalks, which then appeared to have crumbled and disintegrated; that said defects were due to the fact that Wyllie did not perform his work in accordance with the ordinance, contract and specifications, and did not use the proper and required amount of cement or proper quality of cement, and did not mix the ingredients of said cement in proper proportions, and that all this was unknown to the village and its agents or representatives, and conld not have been known to it and them by the exercise of ordinary care or any degree of care implied in the ordinance, bid, contract and specifications; and said amended declarations in legal effect charged fraud on the part of the contractor. The proof sustained these allegations and was undisputed. One of the ingredients of said sidewalks was required to be a certain brand of cement used in certain specified proportions with the other ingredients. Whenever the village inspector was present at the mixing of the material the required proportion of said cement was put into the mixer and portions of said sidewalks did not disintegrate. But the proof showed by numerous .circumstances that at other times the contractor put in only 60 per cent of the cement required by the ordinance and contract, and this was unknown to the village authorities when the work was accepted and when the county court orders were made. Under such circumstances the situation is similar in principle to that discussed in Monahan v. Fitzgerald, 164 Ill. 525, and the contractor is not relieved from the consequences of his fraud by reason of the acceptance or of the order, which is but an approval of the acceptance and of course for the same reason the surety is not relieved.

It is argued that the village failed to have such inspection of the work as it proceeded as the law requires. The brief time spent by the inspector on the work is justly subject to criticism. But the proof shows that this particular fraud by the contractor in using'only 60 per cent of the cement required could not be detected by the ordinary inspection as the work as it proceeded appeared as well as if the proper proportion of cement had been used. This particular fraud could only have been detected by having an inspector present at all times when the concrete was mixed, and by having him count the bags of cement and the bags of the other materials in each mixing. We do not suppose such a constant supervision was intended by the statute or by the ordinance; and the question whether this was such an inspection as was required was submitted to the jury by an instruction, and was decided in favor of the village, and we see ho reason to disagree with that conclusion.

It is contended that the contracts which the village afterwards let for the repair of the work were illegal because not submitted to a competitive bidding. If so, we do not see that this should avail appellant. But section 50 of said Act (J. & A. ff 1465) permits the contract to be entered into without advertising for bids by a vote of two-thirds of all the aldermen or trustees elected. The village was under the commission form of government and the commissioners all voted to let these contracts, and therefore there is nothing in the point.

Complaint is made of rulings upon evidence but we find no reversible error therein.

Appellant claims that the court erred in giving two instructions requested by appellee and in refusing three instructions requested by appellant, and only these instructions are set out in the abstract. The court gave five other instructions requested by appellee and six instructions requested by appellant, and refused eight other instructions requested by appellant. These' are not set out in the abstract. Rule 16 of this court (137 Ill. App. 625) requires the abstract to set out in full every instruction given, modified or refused. The reason for this rule is that where complaint is made of an instruction given at the request of appellee, the court must examine the instructions given for appellant to see whether appellant has embodied the same theory in his instruction, in which case he will not be heard to complain. If instructions requested by appellant are refused, it often is found that the same principle is embodied in other instructions given at appellant’s request. It has long been settled that the ruling of the trial court upon instructions will not be reviewed in a court of appeal unless all the instructions are set out in the abstract. City of Roodhouse v Christian, 158 Ill. 137; Thompson v. People, 192 Ill. 79; Toluca, M. & N. Ry. Co. v. Haws, 194 Ill. 92; People v. Weil, 243 Ill. 208. We therefore consider that the ruling of the court below upon the particular instructions of which complaint is made has not been preserved for review.

The judgments are therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.


author: Mr. Justice Heard

text:
    Edward Thompson Company, Appellant, v. Charles L. Hunt, Appellee.
    Gen. No. 6,776.
    1. Contracts, | 378

      —when execution of contract may he disproved under general issue. Defendant in a suit on a written contract who files a plea of the general issue verified by his affidavit, but files no affidavit denying execution of the contract sued on, is not precluded by section 52 of the Practice Act (J. & A. If 8589) from introducing evidence tending to show that he is not liable on the instrument set forth in the declaration.
    2. Contracts, § 378*—when contemporaneous instrument admissible in evidence. In an action upon a written contract, it is proper to admit in evidence another instrument executed at the same-time, between the same parties and respecting the same subject-matter, even though such evidence tends to vary or contradict the terms of the contract in suit which, by its terms, is apparently complete in itself.
    3. Contracts, $ 389*—when negligence in signing of contract is not question of law. In an action on a contract, where it appears that the contract, which purported to be executed in duplicate, was prepared in defendant’s presence by the agent of plaintiff, plaintiff being a well-known company, that both papers were on the same form, appeared alike, and recited that they were duplicates, it cannot be said, as a matter of law or fact, that defendant was negligent in reading only one of the papers before signing both.
    4. Contracts, § 120

      —what is effect of failure to read contract. Failure to read a paper before signing it is not always negligence.
    5. Sales,- § 9*—when sale is not absolute. In an action upon a contract for subscription to books purporting to be executed in duplicate, the two instruments considered together held to constitute a sale upon approval and not an absolute sale, and that defendant could refuse to keep or pay for the books without assigning any reason.
    6. Appeal and error, § 1498*—when error in exclusion of evidence is harmless. Error in sustaining, in the course of the trial, objections to certain questions in the depositions and striking out the answers thereto is harmless where the questions and answers relate to matters not controverted but admitted by appellee as a witness.
    7. Contracts, § 394*—what instructions are erroneous. In an action on a contract, the refusal of instructions requested by plaintiff, placing an improper construction upon the contract and ignoring defendant’s defense, is proper.
    Appeal from the County Court of Kane county; the Hon. S. N. Hoover, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1920.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 29, 1920.
    Rehearing denied October 12, 1920.
    Bulkley, More & Tallmadge, for appellant.
    Mighell, G-unsul & Allen, for appellee.

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

      See Ulinole Notes Digest, Yols, XX to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, «nray topic and. section number,

   Mr. Justice Heard

delivered the opinion of the court.

There is no dispute as to the facts of this case. The Edward Thompson Company, appellant, is a New York State corporation engaged in the publication of law books. Charles L. Hunt, appellee, is a practicing attorney of St. Charles, Illinois. August 8, 1917, a traveling salesman of appellant solicited appellee for a contract for the sale of American & English Annotated cases. After some conversation appellant’s salesman filled out and presented to appellee two papers which purported to be duplicate contracts, owe to be retained by appellee and the other to be sent to appellant. Appellee read the paper which was to be retained by him and signed both papers. One was retained by appellee and one was sent to appellant by its salesman. The papers were not in fact duplicates. The one sent to appellant is as follows:

“8/6/17.

“To Edward Thompson Company (a corporation organized under the laws of New York).

Northport, L. I., N. Y.

“I hereby subscribe for the American and English Annotated Cases in law buckram binding, and agree to pay you therefor $5.00 per volume carriage paid.

“For volumes one to 60 and the Digests I agree to pay as follows: $5.00 (Check herewith, C. O. D.) Sept. 1st, 1917, and the balance in installments of $15.00 each payable quarterly from Sept. 1st, 1917.

1 ‘ Until otherwise ordered I agree to receive and pay for subsequent volumes as issued, $5.00 per volume on delivery.

“I hereby expressly agree that the right of property in all volumes unpaid shall remain in Edward Thompson Company until the same are wholly paid for; and in case of my failure to meet any one of said installments at maturity or the notes evidencing same, all of said installments or notes remaining unpaid shall, at your option, immediately become due and payable. Interest at 6% after one year from date hereof on all installments then unpaid.

“This order and your acceptance of it constitute the entire contract. No agreement or guaranty inducing me to sign has been made on your behalf which is not herein expressed.

“I acknowledge receipt of a duplicate of this agreement.

“This order is subject to your approval.

(Signed) Chas. L. Hunt, Address to St. Charles, Ill.

‘ Send Bible paper, Buckram Binding.

“Duplicate.

“Salesman, Thomas & Hearn.’’

In the paper retained by appellee, appellant’s salesman had interlined the words “upon thirty days’ approval” after the word “subscribed” and before the word “for” in the first line in the body of the paper. There was also planted upon it, “It is understood that the purchase includes a subscription of Law Notes, as long as issued, during the life of this contract,” and on the margin appeared the words:

“Jas. Thomas,

“Salesman Thomas & Hearn.”

The volumes of the American & English Annotated Cases which had then been published being volumes 1 to 45 inclusive, were shipped from New York on or about the 20th of August to the defendant; also there were shipped two digests at the same time and on or about the 21st day of August they sent the defendant the bill of lading and also sent an index to volumes 1 to 44 inclusive, which was free of charge, and that subsequently on or about the 11th day of September, 1917, they sent by express prepaid volume 46,. and subsequently on November 19, 1917, they sent, express prepaid, volume 47 of the same publication, but they did not ship any subsequent volumes for the reason that the defendant failed to pay for those shipped. The books were not received by appellee until November, 1917. November 7, 1917, appellee wrote appellant as follows:

“St. Charles, Ill. 11/7/17.

“Edward Thompson Co.

Northport, L. I., N. Y.

Gentlemen

Some time ago I purchased of you a set of American and English Annotated Cases but only just received same. I have .looked them over and find they are useless to me and wish to return them to you. .

Kindly let me know where you wish them shipped.

Awaiting your reply, I am,

Tours very truly,

(Signed) Charles Hunt.”

December 21, 1917, appellee wrote appellant as follows:

“St. Charles, Ill., 12/21/17.

“I wrote you some time ago. I was holding these books subject to your orders and am still doing so. Have never unpacked them and do not want them and will not pay until court says I have to.

(Sgd.) Hunt.”

Appellee never unpacked the books, but at all times kept them in good condition in their original boxes, subject to the order of appellant. Appellant brought suit against appellee in the county court of Kane county. A jury trial resulted in a verdict for appellee upon which judgment was rendered and from that judgment appellant appeals. Appellant’s declaration consisted of a count upon the paper sent it by its salesman as the same is above set forth. It also contained the common counts. An affidavit of claim made by appellant’s president was filed with the declaration. Appellee filed the plea of the general issue verified by his affidavit, but filed no affidavit denying the signing of the contract sued upon.

It is contended by appellant that the execution of the contract set forth in the declaration not having been denied by plea verified l>y affidavit, the court erred in admitting in evidence appellee’s purported duplicate order.

Section 52 of the Practice Act (J. & A. f 8589) provides: “No person shall be permitted to deny, on trial, the execution * * * of any instrument in writing, * * * upon which any action may have been brought, * * * when a copy is filed, unless the person so denying the same shall, if defendant, verify his plea by affidavit.”

Appellee does not deny the execution of the instrument set out in the declaration. He admits that fact but denies that, as executed, he is liable thereon.

In Frankland v. Johnson, 147 Ill. 520, the court said: “It is contended by counsel for appellee, that there being no plea, verified by affidavit, denying the execution of the instrument, the defendant cannot question his individual liability upon it. * * * The defendant did not claim the right, on the trial, to deny the execution of the note. He admits that fact, but denies that, as executed, it became his personal obligation. This, we think, he might do without a sworn plea, and that seems to have been the view of the trial court.” We followed this case in Yost v. Eckart, 209 Ill. App. 30.

In Gould v. Magnolia Metal Co., 207 Ill. 172, in construing the section of the Practice Act in question, the Supreme Court said: “That section of the Practice Act establishes a rule of evidence and dispenses with proof of the execution of a written instrument declared upon unless the execution is denied by a verified plea. * * * The only effect of failing to .deny the execution of the contract was to make it admissible in evidence without proof of its execution.”

Appellee was therefore not precluded from introducing evidence tending to show that he was not liable upon the instrument set forth in the declaration. T. Wilce Co. v. Royal Indemnity Co., 289 Ill. 389.

Appellant contends that the admission in evidence of the purported duplicate writing retained by appellee was error because it tended to vary or contradict the terms of a contract which "by its terms was complete in itself.

In Davis v. McVickers, 11 Ill. 327, it was said: ‘1 The notes sued on and the agreement set forth in the plea, having been executed at. the same time, between the same parties, and respecting the same subject-matter, must be construed together, and considered as forming but one contract. Bailey v. Cromwell, 4 Ill. (3 Scam.) 71; Duncan v. Charles, 5 Ill. (4 Scam.) 561.”

In Bradley v. Marshall, 54 Ill. 173, it was said: “The note and the written agreement as to the mode in Avhich it should be payable having been executed together, are to be construed as one agreement.”

In Crandall v. Sorg, 198 Ill. 58, it was said: “The contract and lease were executed as part of the same transaction, related to the same subject-matter, and, though written at different times, are to be construed together as though they constituted but. one writing. This proposition is elementary, and has been too frequently declared by this court to make necessary the citation of authorities.”

In Gould v. Magnolia Metal Co., supra, it was said: “A second ground of objection is that the letter tended to vary a contract which was complete in itself. It is the rule that testimony is inadmissible to contradict or vary the terms of a contract which purports to contain the whole agreement of the parties and shows no uncertainty as to the object or extent of such agreement. In such a case it is conclusively presumed that all previous and contemporaneous engagements by which the parties intend to be bound are contained in the writing. On the other hand, it is equally well established that Avhere the agreement is evidenced by more than one writing, all of them are to be read together and construed as one contract, and all the writings executed at the same time and relating to the same subject-matter are admissible in evidence.”

' In Illinois Match Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 250 Ill. page 400, the court said: “Where two written instruments are executed as the evidence of one transaction, they Avill be read and considered together as one instrument in arriving at the intention of the parties. (Gardt v. Brown, 113 Ill. 475; Crandall v. Sorg, 198 Ill. 48; Gould v. Magnolia Metal Co., 207 Ill. 172; 1 Greenleaf on Evidence, sec. 283.) ” To the same effect are Van Zandt v. Hopkins, 151 Ill. 248; Bradshaw v. Combs, 102 Ill. 428; Commercial Register Co. v. Drew, 168 Ill. App. 347; Heldman v. Gunnell, 201 Ill. App. 172.

The instruments in question in the present ease were executed at the same time, were between the same parties and were respecting the same subject-matter and under the authorities above cited must be construed together as forming one contract and therefore there was no error in the admission of both instruments in evidence.

Appellant contends that appellee was negligent in not reading both papers before signing them. The papers were prepared in appellee’s presence by appellant’s agent. They were both on the same blank form. They appeared to be just alike. Appellee read one of them and according to its recitals the two papers were duplicates. Appellant had a nation-wide reputation among the legal fraternity as a law-book publishing concern. A failure to read a paper before signing it does not always constitute negligence. Strong v. Linington, 8 Ill. App. 436. Appellee had no reason to suspect that the papers were not duplicates as they purported to be. We are not inclined to hold either as a matter of law or of fact that appellee was negligent. On the other hand, it might well be argued that as the instrument sent to appellant and upon which appellant acted contains mention of “a duplicate of this agreement,” that it not only had notice of the existence of two papers which the law of this State required to be construed together as one contract but as both papers were written by appellant’s salesman, it also had notice of the contents of both papers on the theory that notice to the agent was notice to the principal.

In our opinion, construing both papers together, the contract was for a sale upon approval and not an absolute sale and therefore appellee had a legal right to decline to keep the books and refuse to pay fqr the same without assigning any reason. Goodrich v. Van Nortwick, 43 Ill. 445; Kendall v. West, 196 Ill. 221.

Appellant complains of the action of the court during the trial in sustaining objections to certain questions in the depositions and striking out certain answers contained in the depositions. These objections should have been made by appellee before the trial, but appellant ivas not harmed by the error as all- of these questions and answers were upon questions which were not controverted, but were admitted by ap- ■ pellee himself as a witness.

Appellant assigns as error the refusal of the court to give certain instructions asked by it. These instructions placed an improper construction upon the contract and entirely ignored appellee’s defense, and the court did not err in refusing to give them to the jury. •

Upon the undisputed evidence in the case appellant was not entitled to recover, and the judgment of the county court is affirmed.

Affirmed.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

text:
    First District.
    H. E. McDaniel, appellee, v. Fort Dearborn Fireproof Storage Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,571.
    Action to recover for loss of goods while in custody of storage company. Judgment for' plaintiff. Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. F. J. Campbell, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Eugene L. Garey and A. J. Deutschman, for" appellant. Charles W. . Taylor and F. S. Loomis, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Roth Brothers & Company, Inc., appellee, v. Hycon Bronze Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,617.
    Action to recover for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Leo J. Doyle, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Rehearing denied April 26, 1920.
    Thornton & Chancellor, for appellant. Edward L. England, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Baldwin Tool Works, appellee, v. Harry Channon, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,648.
    Action on a written guaranty. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Bernard P. Barasa, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Morrill So Shannon, for appellant; Donald L. Morrill, of counsel. Cutting, Moore So Sidley, for appellee; William D. Bangs and Harold J. Clark, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Nick Colovos, appellee, v. Herman Emmerman, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,685.
    Action for damages to automobile caused by collision with another automobile. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. George B. Holmes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.

      Bernard J. Brown, for appellant. Culver, Andrews, King & Stitt and Raymond Visser, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Nellie E. Gleason, appellee, v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,694.
    Action on two life insurance policies. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gem-mill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    ■Scott, Bancroft, Martin & Stephens, for appellant; John E. MacLeish and Leíand K. Neeves, of counsel. William G. Wise and Worth E. Caylor, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Dever

text:
    Alice M. Tatro, appellant, v. Leonard R. Tatro, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,497.
    Bill for separate maintenance on grounds of cruelty and desertion. Bill dismissed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. .Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Guy M. Walker, for appellant. Charles J. Michal, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered,the opinion of the court.


text:
    Geraldine Franz, appellee, v. John Franz, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,602.
    Contempt proceedings for failure to pay alimony and solicitor’s fees. Order adjudging defendant guilty. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Rehearing denied April 26, 1920.
    William Sherman Stahl, for appellant. Fred F. Weinman, for appellee; Jacob Kaplan, of counsel. -
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John A. Monson, appellee, v. Nels B. Johnson and Nellie Johnson, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,688.
    Bill to foreclose a trust deed. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Walker, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Rehearing denied April 26, 1920.
    William Slack, for appellants. John J. Sonsteby, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Louise Hambleton, appellee, v. B. F. Turner, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,725.
    Bill for an accotinting. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Merrit.t W. Pinckney, Judge, presiding, Heard in this court at the October term, 1919,
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    McSurely, P. J., dissenting.
    E. G. Lancaster, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Holdom

text:
    Board of Education of the City of Chicago for use of Isidor Weil and Benjamin Weil, trading as Weil Brothers, appellee, v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,117.
    Action on a contractor's bond. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Leo J. Doyle, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Sabath, Stafford & Sabath, for appellant; Charles B. Stafford and Thomas M. Zasadil, Jr., of counsel. Culver, Andrews, King & Stitt, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of thé court.


text:
    Board of Education of the City of Chicago for use of Isidor Weil and Benjamin Weil, trading as Weil Brothers, appellee, v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,118.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Leo J. Doyle, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed on opinion in Gen. No. 25,117, ante.

    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Sabath, Stafford & Sabath, for appellant; Charles B. Stafford and Thomas M. Zasadil, Jr., of counsel. Culver, Andrews, King & Stitt, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Board of Education of the City of Chicago for use of Scully Steel & Iron Company, appellee, v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,665.
    Action on an indemnity bond. Judgment for plaintiff. . Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Leo J. Doyle, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Sabath, Stafford & Sabath, for appellant; Charles B. Stafford and Thomas M. Zasadil, Jr., of counsel. Knapp & Campbell, for appellee; Frank T. Winslow, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Board of Education of the City of Chicago for use of Garden City Fan Company, appellee, v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,666.
    Action on a contractor's bond. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Leo J. Doyle, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Sabath, Stafford & Sabath, for appellant; Charles B. Stafford and Thomas M. Zasadil, Jr., of counsel. Stoll & Shepherd, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Daniel W. Roderick, appellee, v. City of Chicago, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,438.
    Action by municipal officer to recover salary for period during which he was unlawfully kept out of office. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Wells M. Cook, Judge, presiding. Heard, in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and judgment here.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Rehearing, denied April 26, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Samuel A. Ettelson, for appellant; Roy S. Gaskill, of counsel. Hope Thompson, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Edwardsville Home Trade Coal Company, appellee, v. Black Gem Coal & Coke Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,490.
    Action to recover for coal sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Harry Olson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Rehearing denied April 26, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Newman, Poppenhusen, Stern & Johnston, for appellant; Lawrence A. Cohen, of counsel. Hoyne, O’Connor & Irwin, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court,


text:
    George Wezmensky, appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,675.
    Action for injuries to person struck by a street ear. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Oscar Hebei, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed with finding of facts.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Rehearing denied April 26, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Charles LeRoy Brown, for appellants; John R. Guilliams and Franklin B. Hussey, of counsel. Harrow, Sissman, Popham & Carlin, for appellee; Sigmund W-. David, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Annie M. Maize, appellee, v. Howard D. Maize, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,711.
    Bill for separate maintenance. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Jay Clifford MeCally, Joseph O. Morris and Fred B. Silsbee, for appellant. Haight, Adcock, Haight & Harris, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Alice G. Watts, administratrix of the estate of Arnold B. Watts, deceased, appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company et al., operating under name of Chicago Surface Lines, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,728.
    Action to recover for death negligently caused. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph B. David, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Dever, J., dissenting in part.
    Charles LeRoy Brown, for appellants; John R. Guilliams and Franklin B. Hussey, of counsel. James C. MeShane, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Virginia H. Kendall, appellant, v. Herbert Ripley, Jr. and Herbert Ripley Wrecking & Excavating Company, appellees.
    Gen. No. 25,745.
    Action in trespass for injury to land. Judgment for defendant Ripley. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Anton T. Zeman, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 12, 1920.
    Samuel B. Hill, for appellant; A. W. Glaskay, of counsel. Foreman, Blumrosen & Black and William Karr Steele, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Minnie A. Scowley, appellant, v. John E. Traeger, sheriff, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,568.
    Action in replevin for two automobiles seized on execution. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. William Fenimore Cooper, Judge, presiding. Heard in this Court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 19, 1920.
    George W. Brown, for appellant. Heth, Balbridge, Lester & Mon-son, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

text:
    Etta Reinders, defendant in error, v. Anton J. Cermak, bailiff of Municipal Court of Chicago, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 24,384.
    Action for trespass for unlawful levy. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. J. J. Cooke, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Allen, Ward & Myers, for plaintiff in error. Charles W. Stiefel and R. B. Salmon, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Charles C. Spotswood, plaintiff in error, v. William F. Jackson, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 24,570.
    Action to recover real estate broker’s commissions. Judgment for defendant. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh J. Kearns, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1920.
    .Cavender & Kaiser and A. D. Ranstead, for plaintiff in error, Ivor Jeffreys, for defendant in error; David H. Jackson, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Anna Strelau, administratrix of the estate of Wilbur MacDonald, deceased, appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company et al., operating under name of Chicago Surface Lines, appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,733.
    Action to recover for death caused by collision between automobile and street car. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon.. Hugo Pam, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1918.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    O’Connor, J., dissenting.
    Charles LeRoy Brown, for appellants; John R. Guilliams and Franklin B. Hussey, of counsel. Pollock, Rainey & Livingston and Robert S. Cook, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Katie Bowling, defendant in error, v. Alonzo Bowling, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 24,946.
    Bill for divorce on ground of cruelty. Decree of divorce, alimony and solicitor’s fees for complainant.' Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Henry Guerin, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Ellis & Westbrooks, for plaintiff in error; Richard E. Westbrooks, of counsel. William L. Martin, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice O ’Connor

text:
    Henry Homeier, defendant in error, v. Calumet Brick Company, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 24,895.
    Action to recover damages for injury to crops by smoke from brick kiln. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. J. J. Cooke, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1920.
    Felsenthal & Wilson, for plaintiff in error; A. R. Miller, of counsel. Rathje, Lawlor & Connor, for defendant in error; Gerard A. Connor, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice O ’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice O'Connor

text:
    William C. Brothers, receiver, appellee, v. John J. Hayes and Frank P. Hayes, trading as Hayes Brothers, appellants.
    Gen. No. 24,926.
    Action on a written lease. Judgment by confession for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Kiekham Seanlan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Litzinger, Healy & Reid, for appellants. Barthell, Fitts & Rundall, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice O'Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice O’Connor

text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Arthur Benedicto Raymond and Raymond Harrison Williams, plaintiffs in error.
    Gen. No. 24,973.
    Conviction on charge of conspiracy to destroy buildings. Error to the Criminal Court of Cook county; the Hon. Theodore Brentano, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March, term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Rehearing denied May 4, 1920.
    Daniel L. Cruiee and John D. Farrell, for plaintiffs in error; Daniel - L. Cruiee, of counsel. Maclay Hoyne, Edward E. Wilson, Edwin J. Baber and Grover C. Niemeyer, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Moore & Company, appellee, v. American Safety Match Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,023.
    Action to recover for labor and materials. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. James Donahoe, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    William Beeda, for appellant. Hoyne, O’Connor & Irwin, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frederick Peake, appellee, v. Vita A. Forlano, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,087.
    Action on a check. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John R. Newcomer, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, . 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Cairoli Gigliotti, for appellant. Frederick Peake, pro se.

   Mr. Justice O ’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In the matter of the petition of Henry Coester, arrested at suit of Frank Lawrence. Frank Lawrence, appellee, v. Henry Coester, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,106.
    Petition under the Insolvent Debtor’s Act. Petition dismissed. Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. John H. Williams, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    William S. Newburger, for appellant. Cruiee & Langille, for appellee; Daniel L. Cruiee, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Taylor

text:
    Edward R. Burt, trading as Edward R. Burt & Company, plaintiff in error, v. Werner N. Dervoe, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 24,893.
    Action on contract of employment as auditor. Judgment for defendant. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Charles N. Goodnow, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and judgment here.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Helmer, Moulton, Whitman & Whitman, for plaintiff in error; Charles R. Holton, of counsel. Guy Van Schaick, for defendant in . error.
   Mr. Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. James R. Mansfield, defendant in error, v. City of Chicago et al., plaintiffs in error.
    Gen. No. 24,910.
    Mandamus to compel city to restore relator to police department as police operator. Writ awarded. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. John Gibbons, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and judgment entered nunc pro tunc.

    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Samuel A. Ettelson, for plaintiffs in error; Roy S. Gaskill, of counsel. No appearance for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    New Century Company, appellee, v. S. Silberman et al., trading as S. Silberman & Sons, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,054.
    Action of forcible detainer. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Bernard P. Barasa, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Newman, Poppenhusen, Stern & Johnston, for appellants; Lawrence A. Cohen, of counsel. Bassler, Bippus & Rose, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Peter Andersen, appellee, v. John R. Geary et al., on appeal of John R. Geary, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,084.
    Action to recover the earnest money paid on a land contract. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Harry M. Fisher, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    William E. Rafferty, for appellant. William G. Wise, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court»


text:
    Andrews Lumber & Mill Company, appellee, v. T. B. Potter, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,093.
    Action to recover balance due on account for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph S. LaBuy, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 21, 1920.
    Elmer Allen Kimball, for appellant. Adams, Childs, Bobb & Wescott, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Taylor

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

text:
    Harry France, appellee, v. Meyer Rosen, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,030.
    Action to recover for damages to automobile caused by collision with automobile of defendant. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. James Donahoe, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Myerson & Slottow, for appellant; Fred E. Newton, of counsel. A. L. Weber, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Burdette D. Carleton and Nellie B. Carleton, appellants, v. Edythe L. Mayer, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,098.
    Bill to review a degree of divorce, Bill dismissed, Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Foell, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    £>. S. Wentworth and David B. Maloney, for appellants. James Todd and Wharton Plummer, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    South Halsted Street Iron Works, appellee, v. Western Iron Company et al., on appeal of First Church of Christ, Scientist, of Oak Park, Illinois, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,108.
    Bill to foreclose lien for materials furnished and work done. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Denis E. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Walter H. Eckert and Warren B. Buckley, for appellant; Charles S. Graves, of counsel. William S. Corbin and Edmund W. Froehlich, for appellee; William S. Corbin, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Martin K. Northam, appellee, v. Chicago Steel Car Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,129.
    Assumpsit to recover commissions earned by procuring a purchaser. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. John J. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Fyffe, Ryner & Dale, for appellant. Cavender & Kaiser and A. D, Ranstead, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Edmund S. Cummings, appellant, v. Ward B. Sawyer, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,142.
    Action to recover rent. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Howard Hayes, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Frederick W. Snider, for appellant. Vent & Warfield, for appellee; Thomas G. Vent, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Albert Pavlak, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 25,291.
    Charge of larceny. Plea of guilty and judgment thereon. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Howard Hayes, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    . William R. Fetzer, for plaintiff in error. Maelay Hoyne and Edward E. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Stella Kozinski, appellee, v. John Sporny, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,337.
    Bastardy proceedings. Judgment against defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Prank H. Graham, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    John J. Poulton, Thomas A. Green and Boy C. Merrick, for appellant. Maelay Hoyne, Edward E. Wilson and John P. Cashen, Jr., for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Barnes

text:
    Victor Chemical Works, appellant, v. Ellsworth Iliff et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 24,751.
    Bill for an injunction restraining disclosure of secret methods of manufacture of phosphate. Bill dismissed. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Poell, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term,' 1918.
    Reversed and remanded with instructions.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Cassoday, Butler, Lamb, Poster & Pope, for appellant; Russell Wiles, Cornelius Lynde, Herbert Pope, Harry Eugene Kelly and Pleteher Lewis, of counsel. Lindhout & Lindhout and Donald H. Mann, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Claude W. Morris, appellee, v. Glen Oak Cemetery Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,013.
    Action on a promissory note. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh J. Kearns, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Jeffery, Campbell & Clark, for appellant; Stephen A. Cross, of counsel. Claude F. Smith and Willard J. Dixon, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frank McKey, trustee in bankruptcy of Arthur B. McCoid, appellee, v. Arthur B. McCoid and Anna L. McCoid, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,037.
    Creditor’s bill to subject real estate of debtor’s wife to a lien. Decree for complainant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Merritt W. Pinckney, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919. .
    Affirmed in part and reversed in" part with directions for modification.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    H. C. Rumery and Spencer Ward, for appellants. Moses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for appellee; Julius Moses and Hirsch E. Soble, of counsel. ,
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the' court.


text:
    John G. O’Neil, appellee, v. City of Chicago, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,095.
    Action to recover damages for breach of contract for installation of boilers. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph B. David, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch ■ Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Samuel A. Ettelson, for appellant; Morton S. Cressy, Adolph Radnitzer and Frank D. Ayers, of counsel. John S. Hummer, Coburn & Bentley and James E. McGrath, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Oscar Krakow, appellant, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,105.
    Action of slander. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Anton T. Zeman, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Lloyd David Heth, for appellant. Hoyne, O’Connor & Irwin, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Anna Bradford, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 25,285.
    Conviction on charge of assault with deadly weapon. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Dennis W. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Ferdinand L. Barnett, for plaintiff in error. Maelay Hoyne, Edward E. Wilson and John F. Cashen, Jr., for defendant in error. /
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Margaret Gerard, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 25,320.
    Conviction on charge of disposing of property by a game of chance. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Richardson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    R. J. Bieg, for plaintiff in error. Maelay Hoyne and Edward E. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Edna Skow, appellee, v. George Bloom, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,542.
    Bastardy charge. Judgment against defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Sheridan E. Fry, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Max Luster, for appellant. Maelay Hoyne and Edward E. Wilson, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Mr. Justice Gridley

text:
    Eleanor Casey, appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,132.
    Action to recover for personal injuries sustained on being struck by street car for which plaintiff was waiting and intended to board as a passenger. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Frank J. Johnston, Jr., Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March terra,. 1919.
    Reversed with finding of facts.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Charles L. Mahony and Watson J. Ferry, for appellants; W. W. Gurley and J. R. Guilliams, of counsel. Vincent D. Wyman, Harry C. Kinne and Charles B. Carpenter, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Leverett Thompson and Thomas Carroll Neal, trustee, plaintiffs in error, v. Abel Davis, trustee, et al., defendants in error.
    Gen. No. 25,318.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Merritt W. Pinckney, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded with directions following opinion in Calumet & Chicago Canal & Dock Co. v. Davis, Gen. No. 25,144, ante, p. 176.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1920.
    Rosenthal, Hamill & Wormser, for plaintiffs in error. Jesse Lowenhaupt and Oscar M. Wolff, for defendants in error.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Sam Elie, appellee, v. Adams Express Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,134.
    Action to recover for personal injuries caused by collision between motorcycle and motor truck. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. John J. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed May 3, 1920.
    Charles B. Elder, for appellant. Lynn & Hallara, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    National Produce Company, appellant, v. Charles F. Murphey Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,403.
    Action to recover for potatoes delivered in frozen condition. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Irwin R. Hazen, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and judgment here.
    Opinion filed May 3, 1920.
    Rehearing denied May 17, 1920.
    Gilbert F. Wagner, for appellant. John T. Evans, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Joseph Wisniewski, appellee, v. Michigan Central Railroad Company and Thomas McGary, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,526.
    Action to recover damages for assault and false imprisonment. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Edward M. Mangan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed May 3, 1920.
    Rehearing denied May 17, 1920.
    Winston, Strawn & Shaw, for appellants; Charles J. McFadden and Taylor Strawn, of counsel. Thomas B. Swanson, for appellee. ;;
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frank Szilvasy, appellee, v. Stern-Smith Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,592.
    Action to recover wages and money expended for benefit of defendant. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Harry M. Fisher, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 3, 1920.
    Michael B. Roderick, for appellant. G. A. Buresh, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Alexander Werner, appellee, v. Chicago Surgical & Electrical Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,697.
    Action to recover commissions earned by sale of corporate stock. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago, the Hon. Dennis W. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 3, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Arthur B. Nelson and William J. King, for appellant. Jeffery, Campbell & Clark, for appellee; Charles V. Clark, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    H. L. Drinkwater, appellee, v. Max Spiegel et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,611.
    Action to recover amount paid for stock of corporation not duly incorporated. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hosea W. Wells, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 3, 1920.
    Lefkow & Lefkow, for appellants. Luther F. Binkley, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois by Maclay Hoyne, appellant, v. Chicago Motor Bus Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,797.
    Quo warranto to try right to operate passenger motor busses on boulevards and parkways. Information dismissed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Jesse A. Baldwin, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 3, 1920.
    Maclay Hoyne, for appellant; John W. Beckwith, W. W. DeArmond and Edmund S. Cummings, of counsel. Fyffe, Ryner & Dale, for appellee; Colin C. F. Fyffe, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In re estate of George F. Alroth, deceased, on appeal of William H. Alroth, administrator, appellant, v. Lizzie Schibilla, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,182.
    Claim in probate court on two notes. Appeal to circuit court. Judgment for claimant. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. John P. McGoorty, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    William Schwemm, for appellant. Martin C. Koebel, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Paul B. Lipinski, individually and as trustee, appellant, v. Maude Rosenbaum et al. (defendants). Magdalina Geng, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,190.
    Bill to foreclose two trust deeds. Bill dismissed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Merritt W. Pinckney, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Samuel K. Markman, for appellant. Cannon & Poage, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Daniel Lewy, appellee, v. Standard Plunger Elevator Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,219.
    Assumpsit for commissions earned by securing contracts for the installation of elevators. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed with judgment here and finding of facts.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    John A. Bloomingston, for appellant. Shaffner & Friend, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Frank Grams, appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company et al., operating under name of Chicago Surface Lines, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,236.
    Action to recover for injuries to passenger on street ear. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Hugo Pam, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Frank L. Kriete and William H. Symmes, for appellants; J. R. Guilliams and C. L. Mahony, of counsel. Finn & Miller, for appellee; O. A. Arnston, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Mary E. Meehan, appellant, v. Oscar G. Foreman et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 25,679.
    Petition for mandamus to compel the trustees of police pension fund to pay pension. Petition dismissed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Frank Johnston, Jr., Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Rehearing denied June 14, 1920.
    Frank B. Murray and Alanson C. Noble, for appellant. Samuel A. Ettelson, for appellees; James W. Breen, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Elizabeth Farrell, appellant, v. Oscar G. Foreman et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 25,580.
    Petition for mandamus to compel trustees of police pension fund to pay pension. Petition dismissed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Frank Johnston, Jr., Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Rehearing denied June 14, 1920.
    Frank B. Murray and Alanson C. Noble, for appellant. Samuel A. Ettelson, for appellees; James W. Breen, of counsel.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    In re estate of Margaret B. Williams, deceased. Mayme B. Jenkins, executrix, appellant, v. Henry White, heir at law and next of kin of Margaret B. Williams, deceased, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,997.
    Petition presenting will for probate. Order denying probate. Appeal to circuit court. Affirmed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1920.
    Transferred to Supreme Court.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Ward & Parrell, for appellant. H. E. Osborn and H. E. Baker, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Louis C. Ehle, appellant, v. Tribune Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 24,837.
    Action of libel. Judgment for nominal damages for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph B. David, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1918.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Rehearing denied June 14, 1920.
    Gideon S. Thompson, for appellant. Shepard, McCormick, Kirkland, Patterson & Fleming, for appellee; Weymouth Kirkland and Charles F. Rathbun, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Bernice Higbee Hermann, by Edith Hermann, appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company et al., operating as Chicago Surface Lines, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,166.
    Action to recover for -injuries to person struck by street car while crossing tracks. Judgment for plaintiff. Appéal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. William Fenimore Cooper, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed with findings of fact.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Charles LeRoy Brown, for appellants; John R. Guilliams and Franklin B. Hussey, of counsel. Quin O’Brien, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Sivert Hollisen, complainant, v. Charles H. Kusel et al., defendants. Raymond A. von Danden, appellant, v. Charles H. Kusel et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 25,177.
    Motion to file a replication to disclaimer of interest in rent fund. Motion denied. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard S. Tuthill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded with directions.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    William R. Brand, for appellant. John E. Grahen, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    H. B. Isaacson & Son, appellee, v. David Bramson, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,215.
    Action to recover balance due for merchandise sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John K. Prindiville, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Morris K. Levinson, for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Jensen, defendant in error, v. H. E. Everett et al., trading as W. Everett & Son, plaintiffs in error.
    Gen. No. 25,273.
    Action in tort against copartners. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John A. Swanson, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    John A. Bloomingston, for plaintiffs in error. Henry B. Baldwin and Prank C. Hill, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    F. Norwood Wilson, trading as Wilson Manufacturing Company, appellee, v. Fred Mayer, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,334.
    Action to recover commission for sale of a locomotive crane. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Arnold Heap, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Rehearing denied June 14, 1920.
    Moses, Bosenthal So Kennedy, for appellant; Hirseh E. Soble, of counsel. Andrew B. Sheriff, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Emil Eiger et al., appellees, v. United Hatters of North America et al., appellants.
    Gen. No. 26,145.
    Bill for injunction restraining acts interfering with complainant’s business. Interlocutory order entered. Interlocutory appeal from the Superior. Court of Cook county; the Hon. Denis E. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Cruice & Langille, for appellants; Daniel L. Cruice, of counsel. Levinson So Hoffman, for appellees; Harry Okin, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Dedina, Jr., by John Dedina, defendant in error, v. Frank Guillaume, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 25,036.
    Action to recover for injuries to person struck by automobile driven at unlawful speed. Judgment for plaintiff. Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the' Hon. M. L. McKinley, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.

      Certiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).
    Ode L. Bankin and Frank L. Childs, for plaintiff in error; Ode L. Bankin and Louis W. McIntyre, of counsel. John F. Bolton and Joseph V. Bolton, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Julius Weiss, appellee, v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,184.
    Action for damages caused by failure to carry out building contract. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Irwin E. Hazen, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and judgment here with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Zimmerman & Garrett, for appellant. Benjamin P. Ackerman, for appellee; William Feldman and Alvin E. Stein, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Kenneth Long by Arthur J. Long, appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company and Vickers Teaming & Transfer Company, appellants.
    Gen. No. 25,212.
    Action for injuries to person struck by street car and run over by wagon. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Frank Johnston, Jr., Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed with finding of fact.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Charles LeRov Brown and Francis X. Busch, for appellants; John R. Guilliams and John E. Kehoe, of counsel. John A. Bloomingston and J. A. Arkin, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Sarah Rubin, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 25,269.
    Conviction on charge of larceny. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh R. Stewart, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Miles J. Devine and Charles S. Deneen, for plaintiff in error. Maelay Hoyne and Edward E. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    National Service Company, appellant, v. Elsie Kuhn, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,302.
    Bill for an injunction restraining employment of an artist. Decree dissolving interlocutory injunction and ordering payment of damages to defendant. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Denis E. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Burkhalter & Newfield and Edwin White Moore, for appellant. Heffron, Perkinson and Berlett, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, v. Arthur Bakeroff, plaintiff in error.
    Gen. No. 25,513.
    Charge of pandering. Plea of guilty and sentence. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Wells M. Cook, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Jacob Katz, for plaintiff in error. Maelay Hoyne and Edward E. Wilson, for defendant in error. ■
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court,


text:
    The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Ida Singer, appellee, v. Benjamin Isakowitch, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,380.
    Bastardy proceedings. Judgment against defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Sheridan E. Fry, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed May 28, 1920.
    Ernest C. Reniff, for appellant. Maclay Hoyne and Edward E. Wilson, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.


author: Per Curiam.

text:
    City of Chicago, appellee, v. Stanley Ratajczak, appellant.
    Gen. Nos. 26,195-26,232 inc.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Hugh R. Stewart, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1920.
    Affirmed for failure to file record in time.
    Opinion filed June 1, 1920.
    No appearance for appellant. Harry B. Miller and Daniel Webster, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.


text:
    Sarah Brosman, plaintiff in error, v. Morris & Company, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 24,931.
    Action for injuries to person run over by an automobile. Judgment for defendant. Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Oscar Hebei, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    Lynn & Hallam, for plaintiff in error. John A. Bloomingston, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    M. J. Mulvihill for use of The Bullis Company, plaintiff in error, v. John C. Shaffer, defendant in error.
    Gen. No. 25,002.
    Action of debt on a decree. Judgment for defendant. Error to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Robert E. Crowe, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    Fyffe, Ryner & Dale, for plaintiff in error. Zane, Morse & McKinney, for defendant in error.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Robert H. Domke, appellant, v. J. W. Smith, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,031.
    Action for rent. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John J. Rooney, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and judgment here.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    Richard j. Cooney and John A. Verhoeven, for appellant. Adams, Childs, Bobb & Wescott, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Brunswick-Balke-Collender Company, appellee, v. Edward Hines Lumber Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,041.
    Action to recover difference between contract and market price of car of lumber not delivered. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Arnold Heap, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    J. Edward Crawford, for appellant. Ryan, Condon & Livingston, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Martha Schultz, appellee, v. William Bartholf, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,051.
    Action to recover damages for fraudulent levy. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Hugo Pam, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    Rehearing denied June 17, 1920.
    John J. Sonsteby, for appellant. Sumner C. Palmer, for appellee.
   Mr. Presiding Justice Thomson

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Cyrus Shank, appellee, v. Chicago Automatic Machine Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,011.
    Action to recover back salary. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Howard W. Hayes, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    William J. Lacey, for appellant. Archibald Cattell and Carl A. Waldron, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Nellie Carlin, guardian of estate of Nathan Flax, appellee, v. Belt Railway Company of Chicago et al., on appeal of Chicago & Western Indiana Railroad Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,039.
    Action to recover for injuries by train to boy playing near tracks. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Kickham Scanlan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    C. G. Austin, Jr. and J. Raymond Barse, for appellant. Richard J. Finn and Oscar C. Miller, for appellee; O. A. Arnston, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    D. A. Schulte, Inc., appellant, v. Saratoga European Hotel & Restaurant Company, appellee.
    Gen. No. 25,048.
    Action to recover overpaid rent. Counterclaim for rent. Judgment for defendant. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Wells M. Cook, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    Le Bosky & Pennington, for appellant. Thomas W. Prindeville, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    Max Goldenberg, trading as M. & J. Goldenberg, appellee, v. New Amsterdam Casualty Company, appellant.
    Gen. No. 25,060.
    Action on a burglary insurance policy. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Arnold Heap, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    Bulkley, More & Tallmadge, for appellant. Moses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for appellee; Walter Bachrach and Hirsch E. Soble, of counsel.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.


text:
    John Budd Company, appellant, v. Louis Mandel et al., appellees.
    Gen. No. 25,078.
    Action by unlicensed foreign corporation to recover amount due on contract for advertising. Judgment for defendants. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Howard Hayes, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1919.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 2, 1920.
    Burton, Kannally & Megan, for appellant. Joseph E. Grossman, for appellees.
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.