PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs.
See 49 App. Div. 541, 63 N. Y. Supp. 694.
PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-
LETT, HAIGHT, VANN, LANDON, and
CULLEN, JJ., concur.

In re SPRAGUE. (Court of Appeals of
New York. March 13, 1900.) Calvin D. Van
Name and Mortimer S. Brown, for appellant.
George J. Greenfield, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs.
See 40 App. Div. 615, 57 N. Y. Supp. 1128.
PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-
LETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, VANN, and
LANDON, JJ., concur.

In re SPRAGUE. (Court of Appeals of
New York. April 20, 1900.) Motion for re-
argument denied, with $10 costs. See 162 N.
Y. 611, 57 N. E. 1125.

STEEL-CABLE ENGINEERING CO., Re-
spondent, v. AMERICAN GLUCOSE CO.,
Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York.
May 15, 1900.) James McC. Mitchell and
John G. Milburn, for appellant. John L. Ro-
mer, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order af-
firmed, with costs. See 19 App. Div. 628, 46
N. Y. Supp. 1101.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT,
MARTIN, VANN, CULLEN, and WERNER.
JJ., concur.

STOKES, Respondent, V. HOFFMAN

HOUSE OF NEW YORK, Appellant. (Court
of Appeals of New York. March 20, 1900.)
Motion to put on calendar and prefer an ap-
peal from a judgment of the appellate divi-
sion of the supreme court in the First judicial
department, entered January 2, 1900 (46 App.
Div. 120, 61 N. Y. Supp. 821), affirming a
judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon
the report of a referee. The motion was made
upon the grounds that the pendency of this ac-
tion prevents the winding up of the affairs
of the receivership herein, and that it is of
the highest importance to all parties, and the
interests of justice require the speedy deter-
mination of the appeal. Carter, Hughes &
Dwight, for the motion. Turner, McClure &
Rolston, opposed. Motion to put on calendar
and prefer denied, with $10 costs.

STROME, Respondent, v. LONDON AS-
SUR. CORP., Appellant. (Court of Appeals
of New York. March 27, 1900.) Willard
Parker Butler, for appellant. William M.
Benedict, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm-
ed, with costs. See 20 App. Div. 571, 47 N.
Y. Supp. 481.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-
LETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, VANN, and
LANDON, JJ., concur.

SULLIVAN et al., Respondents, v. EUS-
NER, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New
York. June 5, 1900.) Louis Wendel, Jr., for
appellant. Robert McC. Robinson, for respond-
ents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judg-
ment absolute ordered for plaintiffs on the
stipulation with costs. See 27 App. Div. 103,
50 N. Y. Supp. 93.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,
HAIGHT, MARTIN, LANDON, and WER-
NER. JJ.,

concur.

TALCOTT, Appellant, v. NATIONAL CRED-
IT INS. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of
New York. June 5, 1900.) Frederic R. Kellogg,
for appellant. Wheeler H. Peckham and John
B. Green, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 9 App. Div. 433, 41 N. Y. Supp.
281.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,
HAIGHT, LANDON, and WERNER, JJ.,
concur. MARTIN, J., not voting.

TALCOTT, Respondent, V. NATIONAL
CREDIT INS. CO., Appellant. (Court of Ap-
peals of New York. June 5, 1900.) Wheeler
H. Peckham and John B. Green, for appellant.
Frederic R. Kellogg, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs, on opinion below. 28 App. Div. 75,
51 N. Y. Supp. 84.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,
HAIGHT, MARTIN, LANDON, and WER-
NER, JJ., concur.

In re TALMAGE. (Court of Appeals of
New York. Nov. 21, 1899.) Hitchings, Pal-
liser & Moen, for appellant. Arthur Van De-
water, for respondents. No opinion. Order
affirmed, with costs. All concur, except
HAIGHT, J.. not voting, and O'BRIEN, J.,
absent. See 32 App. Div. 10, 52 N. Y. Supp.
710.

In re TALMAGE et al. (Court of Appeals
of New York. Jan. 23, 1900.) Charles E.
Rushmore, Theron G. Strong and Roger S.
Baldwin, for appellants. Hector M. Hitch-
ings and Melvin G. Palliser, for respondents.
PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm-

ed, with costs, on opinion below. 39 App. Div.

466, 57 N. Y. Supp. 427. See 55 N. E. 276.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,

BARTLETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN,
VANN, JJ., concur.

and

TECKEMEYER, Respondent, V. SU-
PREME COUNCIL, ROYAL TEMPLARS
OF TEMPERANCE, Appellant. (Court of
Appeals of New York. May 15, 1900.) A. C.
Harwick and J. H. Tatem, for appellant.
William L. Jones, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 25 App. Div. 631, 50 N. Y. Supp.
1134.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT,
MARTIN, VANN, CULLEN, and WERNER,
JJ., concur.

TERRY, Respondent, v. MOORE, Appel-

lant. (Court of Appeals of New York. April

24, 1900.) Charles Edward Souther, for ap-

pellant. Flamen B. Candler, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 25 App. Div. 625, 49 N. Y. Supp.
1149.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,
HAIGHT, LANDON, CULLEN, and WER-
NER, JJ., concur.

THAYER, Respondent, v. HODGE et al.,

Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York.

March 27, 1900.) Adelbert Moot, for appel-

lants. Spencer Clinton, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs. See 13 App. Div. 627, 43 N. Y. Supp.

1165.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-

LETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, VANN, and

LANDON, JJ., concur.

THOMAS et al., Respondents, v. SCHU-

MACHER et al., Appellants. (Court of Ap-

peals of New York. May 8, 1900.) George

W. Seligman, for appellants. Charles E.

Rushmore, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judg-

ment absolute ordered for plaintiffs on the

stipulation, with costs, on opinion below. 17

App. Div. 441, 45 N. Y. Supp. 166.

O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, MARTIN, VANN,

and LANDON, JJ., concur. HAIGHT, J.,

not voting.

THOUSAND ISLAND PARK ASS'N, Re-

spondent, v. GRIDLEY, Appellant. (Court of

Appeals of New York. March 27, 1900.)

Louis L. Waters, for appellant. Edwin Not-

tingham, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs. See 17 App. Div. 621, 44 N. Y. Supp.

1130.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-

LETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, VANN, and

LANDON, JJ., concur.

TIBBITS, Respondent, v. PHIPPS, Appel-

lant (PHILLIPS et al., Respondents). (Court

of Appeals of New York. June 5, 1900.)

Isaac N. Mills, for appellant. W. R. Spooner
and Frank A. Bennett, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order af-
firmed, with costs. 30 App. Div. 274, 51 N. Y.
Supp. 954.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,
HAIGHT, MARTIN, LANDON, and WER-

NER, JJ., concur.

TIMMERMAN, Respondent, v. O'NEILL,
Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York.
June 12, 1900.) Seward A. Simons, for ap-
pellant. George L. Lewis, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs, on opinion below. 13 App. Div. 551, 43
N. Y. Supp. 1165.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT,
MARTIN, VANN, CULLEN, and WERNER,
JJ., concur.

TOBIAS, Appellant, v. WIERCK et al., Re-
spondents. (Court of Appeals of New York.
June 5, 1900.) George Welwood Murray and
Allen W. Johnson, for appellant. Henry D.
Hotchkiss and R. B. Aldcroftt, Jr., for respond-
ents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judg-
ment absolute ordered for defendants on the

stipulation, with costs. See 30 App. Div. 486,

52 N. Y. Supp. 312.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,
HAIGHT, MARTIN, LANDON, and WER-
NER, JJ., concur.

TOMPKINS COUNTY NAT. BANK, Re-
spondent, v. BUNNELL & ENO INV. CO.,
Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York.
June 5, 1900.) Walter Welch, for appellant.
William N. Noble, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with

costs, on opinion below. 8 App. Div. 90, 40 N.

Y. Supp. 411.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,

HAIGHT, MARTÍN, and WERNER, JJ.,

concur.

TREACY, Plaintiff, v. ELLIS et al., De-

fendants (MOSES, Appellant; SCHAFFNER,

et al., Respondents). (Court of Appeals of

New York. March 6, 1900.) Motion to dis-

miss an appeal from an order of the appellate

division of the supreme court in the First

judicial departmert, entered December 13, 1899
(45 App. Div. 492, 61 N. Y. Supp. 600), af-

firming an order granting the application of
the respondents herein for the distribution of

certain funds in the hands of the chamberlain

of the city of New York, and denying the ap-

plication of appellant to set aside the transfer

to respondent Schaffner by the receiver of the

Grand Central Bank, and to distribute said

fund to the stockholders of said bank. The

motion was made on the ground that the ap-

peal cannot be taken as of right to the court

of appeals, the order appealed from not be-

ing one finally determining an action or special
proceeding, nor one granting a new trial on

exceptions, nor has the appellate division al-

lowed said appeal, nor certified that questions

of law have arisen which should be reviewed

by this court. William J. Leitch, for the mo-

tion. Henry B. Heylman, opposed. Motion to

dismiss appeal granted, and appeal dismissed,

with costs.

TRUE, Respondent, v. LEHIGH VAL. R.

CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New

York. Feb. 6, 1900.) John M. Brainard, for

appellant. Halliday & Denton, for respond-

ent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 37 App. Div. 625,'56 N. Y. Supp.
1118.

O'BRIEN, BARTLETT, HAIGHT, MAR-
TIN, and VANN, JJ., concur. PARKER, C.
J., not voting.

TRUESDELL, Respondent, v. BOURKE,
Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York.
Jan. 9, 1900.) Louis Marshall, for appellant.
William Kennedy, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judg-
ment absolute ordered for plaintiff on the stipu-
lation, with costs in all courts. All concur,
except PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, J., dis-
senting. See 29 App. Div. 95, 51 N. Y. Supp.
409.

TRUSTEES OF EMANUEL CHURCH,
Respondent, v. BRITISH AMERICA ASSUR.
CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New
York. April 6, 1900.) A. T. Clearwater, for
appellant. Howard Chipp, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order af-
firmed, with costs. See 20 App. Div. 636, 47
N. Y. Supp. 1150.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT,
MARTIN, VANN, CULLEN, and WERNER,
JJ., concur.

TULLY, Respondent, v. NEW YORK & T.
S. S. CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of
New York. March 20, 1900.) George S.
Coleman, Tallmadge W. Foster, and Thomas
B. Hewitt, for appellant. Edwin R. Leavitt,
for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 10 App. Div. 463, 42 N. Y. Supp.
29.

PARKER, C. J., and MARTIN, VANN,
and WERNER, JJ., concur. GRAY and
BARTLETT, JJ., not voting.

In re TUTHILL et al. (Court of Appeals of

New York. Feb. 13, 1900.) Motion to prefer

an appeal from a judgment and order of the

appellate division of the supreme court in the

Second judicial department, entered January

30, 1899 (36 App. Div. 492, 55 N. Y. Supp.

657), reversing an order of the county judge

of Orange county confirming certain assess-
ments, and the judgments duly entered on such
order, and vacating and setting aside the
proceedings. The motion was made upon the
grounds that the judgment of the appellate
division declared a legislative enactment un-
constitutional, and that the speedy hearing
and determination of the appeal is of public
T. V. Sanford, for the motion.
importance.
No opinion. Motion to prefer granted.

In re VANDERBILT'S ESTATE. (Court
of Appeals of New York. June 19, 1900.)
Henry B. Anderson, for appellants. Jabish
Holmes, Jr., and Edgar J. Levey, for respond-
ent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs,

on opinion below. 50 App. Div. 246, 63 N. Y.

Supp. 1079.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-

LETT, HAIGHT, VANN, LANDON, and

CULLEN, JJ., concur.

VAN NOSTRAND et al., Appellants, v. MAR-

VIN et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals

of New York. Jan. 30, 1900.) Elmer E.

Roosa, for appellants. Alfred Jaretzki, for re-

spondents.

PER CURIAM Appeal dismissed, with costs.

See 16 App. Div. 28, 44 N. Y. Supp. 679.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-

LETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, VANN, and

LANDON, JJ., concur.

VAN SICKLEN et al., Respondents, v. JA-

MAICA ELECTRIC LIGHT CO., Appellant.

(Court of Appeals of New York. March 13,

1900.) Motion to dismiss an appeal from an

order and judgment of the appellate division

of the supreme court in the Second judicial

department, entered December 2, 1899 (45 App.

Div. 1, 61 N. Y. Supp. 210), affirming a judg-

ment in favor of plaintiffs, and an order deny-

The motion

ing a motion for a new trial.

was made on the grounds that the decision of

the appellate division was unanimous, that no

questions of law are raised by the exceptions

which can be reviewed by this court, and that

such exceptions are frivolous. James C. Van

Sicklen, for the motion. Monfort & Faber,

opposed. Motion to dismiss appeal denied,

with $10 costs.

VOSSELLER, Appellant, v. SLATER et al.,

Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York.

May 15, 1900.) Ticknor & Pierce, for appel-

lant. Adolph Rebadow, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judg-

ment absolute ordered for defendants on the

stipulation, with costs. See 25 App. Div. 368,

49 N. Y. Supp. 478.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,

HAIGHT, LANDON, CULLEN, and WERN-

ER, JJ., concur.

WAMSLEY, Respondent, v. ATLAS S. S.

CO., Limited, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of

New York. June 12, 1900.) Motion to dis-

miss an appeal from a judgment of the appel-

late division of the supreme court in the First

judicial department, entered April 9, 1900 (50

App. Div. 199, 63 N. Y. Supp. 761), affirming

a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon

a verdict, and an order denying a motion for

a new trial. The motion was made upon the

ground that the judgment is not appealable

to this court, it having been entered upon a

verdict and unanimously affirmed by the ap-

pellate division, which has not allowed the

appeal nor certified that questions of law

have arisen which should be reviewed by the

court of appeals. Alexander S. Bacon, for

the motion. Everett P. Wheeler, opposed.

Motion denied, with $10 costs.

WARNE, Respondent, v. STANTON, Ap-

pellant. (Court of Appeals of New York.

March 6, 1900.) Richard Crowley, for appel-

lant. Filkins & Coe, for respondent.

WELLS, Respondent, v. CITY OF BROOK-
LYN, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New
York. May 1, 1900.) John Whalen, Corp.
Counsel (William J. Carr, of counsel), for ap-
pellant. Frederick E. Crane and James D.
Bell, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 21 App. Div. 626, 47 N. Y. Supp.
1151; 53 N. E. 1133.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT,
MARTIN, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., con

cur.

WELLS, Respondent, v. METROPOLITAN
LIFE INS. CO., Appellant. (Court of Ap-
peals of New York. May 22, 1900.) William
S. Jenney, for appellant. D. P. Morehouse,
for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order af-
firmed, with costs, on prevailing opinion below.
19 App. Div. 18, 46 N. Y. Supp. 80.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT,
MARTIN, VANN, CULLEN, and WERNER,
JJ., concur.

In re WHEELER'S WILL. (Court of Ap-
peals of New York. Jan. 30, 1900.) Charles
S. Lester, for appellant. Edwin Countryman
and Seward A. Simons, for respondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs, on opinion below. 32 App. Div. 183, 52
N. Y. Supp. 943.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-
LETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, and VANN, JJ.,
concur.

In re WHITE. (Court of Appeals of New
York. Feb. 27, 1900.) Motion for reargument
denied, with $10 costs. See 160 N. Y. 685, 55
N. E. 1101..

WHITE, Respondent, v. RANKIN, Appel-
lant (CHRISTIAN, Respondent). (Court of
Appeals of New York. March 27, 1900.)
George F. Alexander, for appellant. Hector
M. Hitchings and George V. Brower, for re-
spondents.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order af-
firmed, with costs. See 18 App. Div. 293, 46
N. Y. Supp. 228.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-
LETT, HAIGHT, MARTIN, VANN, and
LANDON, JJ., concur.

In re WIELAR. (Court of Appeals of New
York. June 19, 1900.) Jacob Marks, for ap-
pellant. Justus A. B. Cowles and Charles P.
Cowles, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order of appellate division
reversed, with costs in this court only, and
the order of the surrogate affirmed, without
costs, on the authority of In re Leggat, 162
N. Y. 437, 56 N. E. 1009. See 47 App. Div.
642, 62 N. Y. Supp. 1151.

PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-
LETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and LANDON,
JJ., concur.

WILDER, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN
ST. RY. CO., Respondent. (Court of Appeals of
New York. Feb. 16, 1900.) Samuel S. White-
house, for appellant. Charles F. Brown and
Henry A. Robinson, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 10 App. Div. 364, 41 N. Y. Supp.
931.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, BARTLETT,
MARTIN, VANN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

WILLCOX & GIBBS SEWING-MACH. CO...
Appellant, v. HIMES, Respondent. (Court of
Appeals of New York. April 3, 1900.) George
W. Van Slyck, for appellant. Austen G. Fox,
for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment and order affirm-
ed, with costs. See 17 App. Div. 637, 45 N. Y.
Supp. 1151.

GRAY, BARTLETT, MARTIN, VANN,
CULLEN, and WERNER, JJ., concur.

WINGROVE, Respondent, v. WAGNER, Ap-
pellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. May
15, 1900.) Joseph A. Arnold, for appellant.
Louis Wertheimer, for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with
costs. See 31 App. Div. 630, 53 N. Y. Supp.
1118.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, O'BRIEN,
HAIGHT, LANDON, CULLEN, and WER-
NER, JJ., concur.

WOERZ, Respondent, v. SCHUMACHER et
al., Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York,
June 22, 1900.) Motion for reargument denied.
with $10 costs. See 161 N. Y. 530, 56 N. E.
72.

In re WOOD et al. (Court of Appeals of New
York. June 22, 1900.) George W. Stephens,
for appellants. John Whalen, Corp. Counsel
(William J. Carr, of counsel), for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs.
See 35 App. Div. 363, 54 N. Y. Supp. 978.
PARKER, C. J., and O'BRIEN, BART-
LETT, HAIGHT, VANN, and LANDON, JJ.,

concur.

WOODBRIDGE

CO.. Respondent, V.
CHARLES E. HIRES CO., Appellant. (Court
of Appeals of New York. May 15, 1900.) John
A. Garver, for appellant. Edward W. Sheldon,
for respondent.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, and judg
ment absolute ordered for plaintiff on the stipu-
lation, with costs. See 19 App. Div. 128, 45 N.
Y. Supp. 991.

PARKER, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT,
LANDON, CULLEN, and WERNER, JJ., con-
cur. O'BRIEN, J., not voting.

WRIGHT, Respondent, v. CITY OF MT.
VERNON, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of
New York. March 6, 1900.) Motion to restore
an appeal, dismissed for failure to file the re-
turn herein, from a judgment of the appellate
division of the supreme court in the Second ju-
dicial department, entered December 2, 1899 (44
App. Div. 574, 60 N. Y. Supp. 1017), reversing
a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon
the report of a referee. and granting a
trial. William J. Marshall, for the motion.
Milo J. White, opposed. Motion to restore ap-
peal granted, without costs to either party.

new

ARNOLD et al. v. CITY OF CHICAGO.
(Supreme Court of Illinois. June 21, 1900.)
Error to Cook county court; 0. N. Carter,
Judge. Action by the city of Chicago against
Arnold and others. Judgment for plaintiff.
Defendants bring error. Reversed. George
W. Wilbur, for plaintiffs in error. Charles M.
Walker, Corp. Counsel, Armand F. Teefy, and
Denis E. Sullivan, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM. The ordinance in this case
contains the same defect that was condemned
in Holden v. City of Chicago, 172 Ill. 263, 50

N. E. 181, and the decision in that case and
subsequent cases holding the same doctrine
must control here. The judgment will be re-
versed and the cause remanded. Reversed and
remanded.

BEACH et al. v. CITY OF CHICAGO.
(Supreme Court of Illinois. June 21, 1900.)
Error to Cook county court; O. N. Carter,
Judge. Objections by Elli A. Beach and oth-
ers to proceedings to confirm a special assess-
ment for improvements by the city of Chicago.
Judgment of confirmation, and said Beach and
others bring error. Reversed. William F.
Carroll and M. F. Cure, for plaintiffs in error.
Charles M. Walker, Corp. Counsel, Armand
F. Teefy, and Denis E. Sullivan, for defendant
in error.

PER CURIAM. Elli A. Beach and others,
plaintiffs in error, complain that the county
court of Cook county erred in confirming a
special assessment upon their lots for putting
in a combined curb and gutter on Drexel ave-
nue and certain other streets in Chicago, and
that the ordinance was invalid because it did
not sufficiently describe the combined curb
and gutter. The ordinance was insufficient in
substantially the same respects as the one in-
volved in Holden v. City of Chicago, 172 Ill.
263, 50 N. E. 181, which was held invalid.
The judgment of confirmation is reversed and
the cause remanded. Reversed and remanded.

DANVILLE WATER CO. v. CITY OF
DANVILLE. (Supreme Court of Illinois.
June 21, 1900.) Appeal from circuit court,
Vermilion county; F. Bookwalter, Judge. Suit
between the Danville Water Company and the
city of Danville. From a decree the water
company appeals. Affirmed. W. R. Lawrence
and Remey & Mann, for appellant. J. H.
Lewman, City Atty., and G. F. Rearick, for
appellee.

PER CURIAM. This case has practically
been before us on two former occasions, the
parties then being reversed. Counsel for ap-
pellant concedes the judgment from which this
appeal is taken is in exact conformity with the
judgments and opinions in the former cases,
and that no new question or matter has inter-
vened since the former hearings here. Mani-
festly the only purpose of this appeal is to ob-
tain a final judgment in this court, to enable
appellant to take a further appeal if it should
desire to do so. Adhering, as we do, to the
reasoning and conclusions announced in City
of Danville v. Danville Water Co., 178 Ill. 299,
53 N. E. 118, and Id., 180 Ill. 235, 54 N. E.
224, on the authority of these cases this judg-
ment will be affirmed. Judgment affirmed.

LARSON et al. v. CITY OF CHICAGO.
(Supreme Court of Illinois. June 21, 1900.)
Error to Cook county court; O. N. Carter,
Judge. Action by the city of Chicago against
Adolph Larson and others. Judgment for
plaintiff. Defendants bring error. Reversed.
William F. Carroll and M. F. Cure, for plain-
tiffs in error. Chas. M. Walker, Corp. Coun-
sel, Armand F. Teefy, and William M. Pin-
dell, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM. The ordinance in this case
contains the same defect which was condemn-
ed in Lusk v. City of Chicago, 176 Ill. 207, 52
N. E. 54, and Davidson v. Same, 178 Ill. 582,
53 N. E. 367. The decisions in those cases
must control here. The judgment will be re-
versed and the cause remanded. Reversed &
remanded.

LIQUID CARBONIC ACID MFG. CO. v.
CONVERT et al. (Supreme Court of Illinois.