173. Raymond et al. v. City of Cleveland et al. Error to the District Court of Cuyahoga County. Former entry set aside. Judgment afrmed. To be reported hereafter.

849. Garretson, Blackmore & Co. v. Ballour, sheriff, etc. Error to the District Court of Muskingum County. Judgment affirmed. No

further report.

388. Stahl v. Idleman.

Error to the District Court of Marion County.
No further report.

Judgment affirmed. 564. Block v. Holtzman. Error to the District Court of Miami County. Judgment affirmed, with penalty of two per cent. per annum interest on the amount found due and $25 attorneys' fee.

861. Arrowsmith v. Harmoning, administrator, etc., et al. Error to the District Court of Defiance County. Motion for a rehearing overruled.

889. Strickland v. City of Cleveland. Error to the District Court of Cuyahoga County. Judgment affirmed. To be reported here

after.

928. The State ex rel. Attorney General v. The Monitor Fire Association. Quo warranto. Judgment of ouster. To be reported hereafter.

MOTION DOCKET.

349. Decker et al. v. Britting et al. Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Hamilton County. Motion granted. 872. Webb et al. v. Clayton, treasurer, etc., et al. Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Wood County. Motion overruled.

378. Brownell v. Colbath Steam Heating Co. Motion for leave to file petition in error to the District Court of Hamilton County. Motion granted.

874. The State v. Myers. Motion to take cause No. 863. General Docket, out of its order. Motion overruled.

875. The State ex. rel, etc., v. Robinson et al. Motion to take cause No. 969, General Docket, out of its order. Motion overruled.

376. Slagle et al., guardians, etc., v. Anderson et al., trustees, etc. Motion to dispense with printing the record in cause No. 930, General Docket. Motion granted.

377. McBride v. Ward. Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Logan County. Motion granted. The judgment of the district court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed. 378. McBride v. Snyder. Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Logan County. Motion granted. The judg

ment of the district court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.

1. Ordered that E. L. Taylor, W. J. Gilmore, H. J. Booth, W. O. Henderson, H. T. Stockwell, Clark Irwine, Arnold Green and Thos. S. Woods be appointed a standing committee for the examination of applicants for admission to the bar, to serve during the year 1885. 2. For the purpose of securing a uniform standard of proficiency of applicants, and a thorough test of qualifications for admission it is ordered, that the foregoing committee act together as one committee in the examination of each class, and that in addition to the written examinations now required, each class be subjected to an oral examination, so far as may be necessary to aid in determining the fitness of applicants for admission.

3. Ordered that the examinations for the ensuing year (1885) be held on the first Tuesday of January, March, June, October and December.

No. 506. Bank v. Singer. Error to the District Court of Harrison

County.

MARTIN, J.

1. A mortgage of land made by a husband to his wife without the intervention of a trustee to secure his just debt to her is, as a grant, void at law and in equity; but is enforceable as an equitable lien simply.

2. Where such mortgage is duly recorded and the wife, subsequently and after condition broken, unites with her husband in a mortgage of the same land to his creditor, joining in the granting clause and in a warranty against the lawful claims of all persons, and releases dower in the testatum clause; Held, her equitable lien is not thereby released or postponed.

3. Except as between the mortgagor and mortgagee, a valid mortgage is, in this state, considered as a mere security.

Judgment affirmed.

GRANGER, C. J.. and NASH, J., dissent.

543. B. & O. R. R. Co. v. Urich's adm'r. Error to the District Court of Richland County.

NASH, J.

When a railroad company unnecessarily leaves in its yard a locomotiveengine, with a valve attached, which opens automatically whenever steam to the amount of one hundred and twenty pounds is raised, and so near the crossing of a public highway as to frighten horses upon such highway, it is guilty of negligence.

Judgment affirmed.

DICKMAN and MCCAULEY, J. J., dissent to the judgment.

512. The State of Ohio, on relation of Louis E. Holtz, v. The County Comissioners of Henry County. Error to the District Court of Henry County.

602. The Board of County Commissioners of Wood County v. The State of Ohio ex rel. Lewis E. Holtz. Error to the District Court of Wood County.

GRANGER, C. J.

1. The act entitled "an act to authorize the commissioners of the counties of Putnam, Wood and Henry to levy a tax to pay for certain fees therein named," passed March 19, A. D. 1879, (76 O. L., 213) does not conflict with the constitution of the state.

2. A claimant entitled to a payment under said act, whose account made out, attested, approved and certified, was duly presented to the county commissioners, and payment refused, is entitled, upon proper application, to a writ of mandamus to enforce payment.

3. The commissioners of the county should pay one-third of such claim, although prior to the demand, they had, by paying more than onethird of other claims, disbursed more than "one-third part of all the fees and costs provided for" in said act.

The judgment of the District Court of Henry County is reversed and a peremptory writ awarded; the judgment of the District Court of Wood county is affirmed.

202. Pierce et al. v. First National Bank of Delaware.

Error to the Dis

trict Court of Delaware County. Judgment affirmed. No further report.

412. Thayer v. Continental Life Ins. Co. Error to the District Court of Cuyahoga Co. Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff. No further report.

551. Kunst v. Muller. Error the District Court of Hamilton County. Judgment affirmed. No further report.

573. Fowler et al. v. Poyer. Error to the District Court of Erie County. Judgment affirmed. No further report.

Error to the District
No further report.
Monroe Bank et al.

577. Commercial Bank of Union City v. Steel. Court of Darke County. Judgment affirmed. 591. Woodsfield & Steubenville M. Ins. Co. v. Error to the District Court of Monroe County. Judgment affirmed. No further report.

MOTION DOCKET.

59. Pennsylvania Company v. Hine. Motion for a rehearing of cause No. 466, General Docket. Motion overruled.

61. Burgner v. Humphrey. Motion to modify judgment in cause No. 339, General Docket. Motion overruled.

62. Brill v. Singer Mf'g Co. Motion to modify judgment in cause No. 258, General Docket. Motion overruled.

All causes and motions undisposed of at this term are continued.

The Commission adjourned for the term of 1884 sine dis.

DIGEST OF CASES.

Attorney and Client Authority of Attorney Presumed - Admissions Pendente Lite-Accord without Satisfaction.-If the authority of an attorney-at-law who appears for one party to an action is denied by the opposite party, the burden of showing lack of authority is upon the latter. Upon a motion te vacate garnishee proceedings for a defect in the affidavit on which they were founded, affidavits on behalf of the plaintiff stated that, pending the motion, the defendant had admitted the justice of the plaintiff's claim, and had given him an order on her attorney for a sum of money which the defendant agreed to accept, when paid, in full satisfaction of his demand, but that, on the presentation of such order, said attorney had refused to pay it. Held, that the facts thus stated did not show an accord and satisfaction which would prevent the further prosecution of the action, nor, on such ex parte showing, should they operate against the defendant to prevent the granting of the motion. Schlitz v. Meyer, S. C. Wis. 21 N. W. Rep., 243.

Constitutional Law—Rights of Citizens of other States.—Our law granting the right of attachment against a non-resident debtor is not in conflict with section 2, article 4 of the constitution of the United States, or the fourteenth amendment to said constitution. Pyrosulite Co. v. Ward, S. C. Ga., Dec. 2, 1884.

Criminal Law-Murder of Wife-Evidence of Previous Assaults-Opinions as to Cause of Death.-On the trial of a husband for the murder of his wife by acts of personal violence, evidences of previous ill-treatment of or assaults upon his wife by the accused is admissible to show the state of feeling between them. Medical witnesses qualified as experts may give their opinions as to the cause of the death of a person. Boyle v. State, S. C. Wis. 21 N. W. Rep., 283.

Evidence-Federal Courts-Privileged Communications. - The provision in the New York Civil Code that "a person duly sworn to practice physic or surgery, shall not be allowed to disclose any information which he acquired in attending a patient, in a professional capacity, and which was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity," is obligatory upon the courts of the United States, sitting within that state, in trials at common law. Conn. Mut. L. Ins. Co., U. S. S. C., Nov. 17, 1884.

Infant Trespasser—Jumping off Street Car.-While two horse cars attached together in charge of a driver on the front platform of the leading car, and drawn by a single horse, were driving over the tracks of the company in a public highway in the city of Providence, from the stables to the repair shops, a lad six years old, to outstrip a playmate with whom he was racing, jumped on the rear platform of the leading car and soon afterward fell off or jumped off and was seriously injured. The driver testified that he did not see the boys and knew nothing of the accident, which occurred between 2 and 3 P. M., until the evening. In an action against the horse car company to recover damages for the injury, held, that company was not chargeable with negligence. That the driver of the car was not chargeable with any neglect of duty. Held, further, that the company was not bound to employ a second man to guard the cars from intrusion during their transit, nor was it under any duty or obligation of care to the boy. A city ordinance provided that “cars driven in the same direction shall not approach each other within a distance of three hundred feet except in case of accident, when it may be necessary to connect two cars together, and also except at stations.” Held, that the ordinance applied only to cars going in the same direction and driven separately, and was inapplicable to the case at bar. Bishop v. Union Railroad Co., S. C. Rh. I. 30 Alb. Law Jour., 9.

Landlord and Tenant Ejectment Breach of Covenant · Waiver. Where a lease contains a cevenant that the lease shall be forfeited if the tenant sublets the premises, and the landlord, knowing that the tenant has sublet, signs the lease, held, that the signing indicated an intention on the part of the landlord to waive his right of forfeiture. Carson v. Wood, S. C. Vict., Oct. 1, 1884. 6 Aust L. T. (N. C.), 92.

Removal of Cases—By a Party, where Co-Defendant or Co-Plaintiff is not Entitled to Removal.-Where a non-resident party has an interest in a controversy in a state court which is separate and distinct from, and does not necessarily involve the interest of, the other defendants in the issue, or the other party on the same side, he can remove the case into the federal court; but if the interests of the parties on the side of the party desiring the removal are so identified and mixed up that they must and should be decided together, and the final decree must depend upon and involve the rights of both parties, then it cannot be removed, where one of the parties on that side is a citizen of the same state as the adverse party. Wilson v. St. L. & S. F. Ry. Co., U. S. C. C., E. D. Mo., Sep. 25, 1884. 22 Fed. Rep., 3.

Stenographer's Transcript of Evidence.-Where the trial court orders the evidence to be taken down in shorthand, and it is so done and properly certified, and it is afterwards transcribed, this is a sufficient compliance with the provision of the statute that the evidence shall be taken down ic writing. It is not necessary that the translation or transcript of the evidence should be made at the time of the trial. Ross v. Loomis, S. C. Ia., Oct. 9, 1884. 20 N. W. Rep., 749.