alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Dr. Douglass A~s1r 

Man•g1ng Editor 

Wllltam and ~ary Quart~rl7 

W1111ansburg, Virgtnta 

Dear Dr. Ada1r: 

REF ID:A69\t2 

• 

424 N. George Maaon Dr. 

Arlington, Va. 

7 NoYember 1949 

RAoelpt ot r~ur very ~ind lPtter or 1 R~ve~ber 1• 

aoltnowledged. 

It ts with considerable regret that I must tell you that l have been un ble t~ do very auoh in conneot1on 

w1 tl1 the art tole you a sited me to pre,t.Jore on e1ghteentb oentur7 oryptography. The prlnoipal reaaon 1s that m7 

health bas noi been of tbe best for the pa9t year or ao 

end I have had to re11nqutab a good many aottvitles and 

interests. However, I am slovl1 getttng stronger and 

have b.;· no :ueans g1ven up the id.ea ot pr";-.;ar1ng such an 

article. I therefore cr~ve your patl~nee and perh&ps by 

next S~rlng will have something to submit. In the meantime, let me thank you !~r the suggestlons cont~tned 1n 

your letter and w~P.n I g~t to the point whe.re I teel 

as tnougb the time has come to approach the various peo~le you mention I wlll get in touch with you. 

Stncer~ly 1our1, 

~ILLIAM F. JRtiDMAN 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 03-31-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
1900D SIM

Log of Temporary Revisions 

TR 

Number TR Date Issued on CD Reason for TR Revision Incorporated On IML CD

StdPrac-1 Jan 2007 IML-1900D Rev 

27A Add Eddy Current Inspection Procedures to the manual E Reissue IML-1900D Rev 31

7/16/2013 3:23:15 PM

Page 1 of 1
• REF ID:A70097 

• 

Prot. Stewart S. C&1rna 

Imst.i tut de Ma.thematique 

Pa.lais de l'Univeraite 

strasbourg, J'rance 

Dear Stewarts 

28 October 1954 

~ tM.nka ror 10ur cllppinc. Appa.rentl1' thli'e'• no 

stopping a clain reaction 1n the nan md.1a once it geta 

started. 

Yea, iD:!eed, I aa.w Sack'• piece in The Rev Yo.rker, a 

ea.tire on a piece by cne Mltl.chior in ~ a couple ot veeka 

betore ... -e.n utter]3 absurd piece ot tripe. 

Glad to hear everythil2g'• goitlg ao well and hope it 

continue• so. 

B,y the V&"¥1 tt in ;rour ptl'qrinatiou )'cu. ehould come 

acroa• book.I. ot 1AteN1t to• and 'S1¥ collectiOA1 t•d be 

glad to bN.Jt from 10'1 bJ air mil berore 7CN IJUt1 'ea up or 

blqJ 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 03-25-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

\ . 

\ 

\ 
RIA ID :A700_97 

.._, .. 

'DIN.~, iv.J..:.,...Q S....·~Ap~ 

ur~ 'L~" ,, •. {. -· 

~ i.,,.'Wl~'fl~ eJ:>J ..;.;._ k J. I~~ 

~~tr-~ 

1.. \& ~ l 1.~--. ~ . 

<::l\. ~..,... ~Ail • '(31 ~ ~ . . . /;;J, YVV\, J . . 

. ~-, ~ .~-' ~.,,.(.( 

·~ ~ o..~ ~. ~ ~~ ... ~ ... l. h JU~·· . . . . 

. 'fJ- +L..... ~A. ~ ~. ~ ,· .h'll ~ J.. 

k-·~·~~ .. ~~:--~---~~~ ~. 

~ -te-. ~~ ~"',, 

cl:.J.. '1r- ~ ''A~ ~-1 ~ ~ ~ 

~ .. ~ J~;,. Se4 .:_ ~ f/JJW"'f~ I . itS~. . .. _ 

...... 
1-~I 

, t · .· ?'RB-:f,~~f:FQ-9-7 _ ' ' ' l.. • l ........ 1~.:r..-.i ~.C-\ , .. _ .j 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

ARMED FORCES SECURITY AGENCY 

WASHINGTON 25. D. C. IN REPLY REP'ER TO 

18 June 1951 

Dear Dadd: 

I am much indebted to J'DU tor 70ur letter ot l MaJ' with its Ter'T 

interesting enclosare. 

Dudl.eJ'-&nith had done so well to arouse 8'J' interest that I am 

sending tor the books he mentions as his authorities an:l will •tud7 

th• intentl.J'. Strangely enoaghJ crJPtographic histo17, so tar as I 

know it, tails nen to mention that chap fflellppea, am I eball b7 

to learn more about him. 

Please conYq llJ' personal thanks to Dudle,-Smith tor hi.a 

research on the case and tor h1a illminating an&qaia. 

Your mte about the use ot mms b7 the Germana settles the 

matter in ll1T own mind. 

I am not slated to go to either of the forthcoming meetings in 

London this summer, but possibl.7 will ccme over in the autum, tar 

another one not yet detinitel.T scheduled. I should be most baPP7 to 

see J'OU then and t.o renew Mendship - maps plq a round ot golt wit.h 

7011. We had a nice round here with Eric, whose putting was much ott 

that dq. He• s a wondertul gal.fer, and I was entire]T beyond ll1T 

depth. Mr partner, Admiral Jack Red.man, saTed· the dq for 'll18 side, 

while Eric's partner, Captain T. A. Smith, USN, was ott his game. So 

the Admiral and I came ott with the honors, much to lllT surprise. 

Reciprocating your kind regards, and trusting that 'llJT letter 

find.a 701J in good health and spirits, I am, 

Captain, the Earl Cairna, R.N •• 

In care ot G.C.H.Q. 

SincereJT 70u:rs, 
14 

I 

,, 

' 

-

·4f~ 

~II
(£) O.u the oth&l' h~ it the fom~ aaid.gmneut. ot title -be det0l'l'ed until after tht.. actual &rtmt ot the patent, the ~t ot a 

t1nal. go~t f ue weul.d th"l'&bt be. avoided. 

,, John a. Gardnel'~ Jr., 

Captain,. Sipl Oorpa, 

3d 1 .. 0 Ind. 8 

War 13.ana & Training Diviaio:a, ~ 6, 19.3' - to• !Qcut1v• Otfieer. 

Approval of requeat contained in paragraph 3 ot 1r. 

J'riedlllante aemorandva of April 19, l9.35 is rec01&lll8nded aubject. to 

the prov.t.:fit)ns ot 2d Meso Indoraaent. 

Inels. (no change). 

s. B • .Akin, 

Major, Signal Corpa. 

4th !~mo. Ind. 

~xecutive Office, May 7, 1935 - To Major .Akin. 

Approved as reco1T1D1ended in 3d Menx> Indorsement, hereon. 

Dawson Olmstead, 

Lt. Col.• Signal Corps 1 

2 

FIL~; Acting Cbiet Signal Officer of the All!ly. 

Ct ' / /) S/'1,1 sr~tl~A~ ---~-1~ ....... . 

pproved for Release by NSA on 03-26-2014 pursuant to E.O. 

13526 
I 

-- REF ID:A70302 

l•t. liemo Ind. 

;.. 

~I'd Plalls & !l'raining Divtsio-n. April ro. 1935. ht lles-earoh and 

~ J)nftl opm&n t lli 'fi si on. 

8 

jp.,?rcT&l recommended. pTa'ri.ded it ts uderetoOO. th.at should the 

letter• patent be granted the goverm.ent 'Ifill ~ able to obtain tt:rf3' and 

all mach1naa duii-ed withou.t the ~t of royalty. 

s .. B .. Ald.n. 

Va.jor, Signal Cor9a. 

Iml. 

l ~Incl. added - ¥emo. 

trom. Jtr. Friedman~ to 

JiaJO!" Akin. fi/l~/3J. 

w1'~ 

2d Mem.!:lrl. 10 

Researah & Bevel-opm-ent DiviJion1 OC,:;1g0, ?Buy 2, lil:S'5. Tot Will" Plans & 

Training lJi '\.ri ,lo-.c .. 

:::. ffheJ:a P.n i!went..i.on l.3 origins.ted b;r im e;yp.l.oyse o~ -t..he Government, 

as in this case,. the Gove~nt. acquires. the usual. license right.a i:rr~spe~ttlve 

of lfhether he lleGOtiP-tes ~'lJ:" ::..t.C.e c£ lU...8 coict...ercitl ::."ights ei t..~ei• before 

or after the tiling ot a f'o-mel. pa.te>-nt z.ppltcatwn qnd the purchaaer ot 

sue41t right:s takes title subject to ~.n irr~bl~, mn-...xclua.ive license 

to the Gover:m!%ellt, which 11cer..se .Jlloulc be eixecuted nt the time the fol"fllal 

patent application is executed • 

.!. ':hat the patent applic!\tion be tiled tllru thn PR.tent Section of 

the 81gna.l Corps ~Dd that attorneys representing the (l(}vftrnmtmt be 

!?Ade attorne.7a ~ record in the origiml. apJl.ica.tion, but that patent 

counsel .for the purchaser of the coDSOroiaJ. right.3 prepare the Specif'ieation. claims aud dr9.Winga tor the application. Bandled 1D thia 

'A7• the case would come under the Act of lBaS as amended and t.lie payment o£ a ~UJJ.Jg ~-would be waived. 

z.... Upon the aetulll tiling of the applioo.tion in the Patent 0.f'!"ioe, an 

e.asoolate power ot e:t'torne7 llOUld be given to patent counsel repreaPnt!ng 

th& purchaser ot coamercinl rights,, i'd th tho under:Jtnnding that S4id patent 

counsel uould be responsible ro:r the prosecution o!" application. All replies 

to patent office actiona prepared by outside patent counsel should be transt.11.tted to the Signal Oorpa Patent Sect.ion tor actuol. tiling in the patent 

of't1ce. 

t,, 

t< -' .-. _.__u:;-~~ "~ ..... ............i._ __ _
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-87,233-02

EX PARTE WARREN RAY PATTON, JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 14-00353A-422-F IN THE 422 DISTRICT COURT ND

FROM KAUFMAN COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of manslaughter and

sentenced to eighteen years’ imprisonment. The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction.

Patton v. State, No. 05-14-01073-CR (Tex. App.—Dallas Nov. 5, 2015).

Applicant contends, among other things, that histrial counsel rendered ineffective assistance

by failing to convey a plea bargain. 

Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these
2

circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294

(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court

shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The

trial court may use any means set out in TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). In the

appropriate case, the trial court may rely on its personal recollection. Id.

If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. 

If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an

attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. 

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the

performance of Applicant’s trial counsel was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s deficient

performance prejudiced Applicant. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and

conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for

habeas corpus relief.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time must

be requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court.

Filed: August 21, 2019

Do not publish
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2132 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to limit the use of taxpayer funded 

union time for employees of the Internal Revenue Service, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 17, 2021 

Mr. BRAUN (for himself, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. CRUZ, Mr. SCOTT

of Florida, and Mr. INHOFE) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to limit the use 

of taxpayer funded union time for employees of the Internal Revenue Service, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘IRS Customer Service 

5 Improvement Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2132 IS

1 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON TAXPAYER FUNDED UNION OFFI2 CIAL TIME FOR INTERNAL REVENUE SERV3 ICE EMPLOYEES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 7131 of title 5, United 

5 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘(e) The authority provided under subsection (d) 

8 shall not apply with respect to the Internal Revenue Serv9 ice, or an employee of the Internal Revenue Service, dur10 ing the periods each year— 

11 ‘‘(1) beginning on February 12 and ending on 

12 May 5; and 

13 ‘‘(2) beginning on September 1 and ending on 

14 November 1.’’. 

15 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 7131(d) of 

16 title 5, United States Code, is amended, in the matter pre17 ceding paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘preceding’’ and insert18 ing ‘‘other’’. 

19 (c) APPLICATION.—The amendments made by sub20 sections (a) and (b) shall supersede the terms of any col21 lective bargaining agreement (including a collective bar22 gaining agreement that is in effect, as of the date of enact23 ment of this Act) that are inconsistent with those amend24 ments. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
STEAM ELECTRIC

C B I R E P L AC E M E NT P A G E

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 20 09

- 0819

DCN:

________________________________________

T H E FO LL OW ING H AS BEE N R E M O V E D BE CAUSE IT

C O N T AINS C O N F ID E N T IAL B USIN E SS IN FO RMA T I O N

(C B I) P E R 4 0 C F R P ART 2

, SU B P ART B

. SE 04360A200
# THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 159TH DISTRIC T COURT OF ANGELINA COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 18 th

day of March, 2015 , the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

DAVID LUKE FORRESTER , Appellant

NO. 12

- 14

- 00114

- CR; Trial Court No. 2012

- 0589

Opinion by Greg Neeley, Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made it s order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and the briefs filed herein, and the same being considered, because it is the opinion of this court that there was error in the judgment of the court below, it is ORDERED, ADJU DGED and DECREED by this court that the judgment be reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court with instructions to dismiss count six of the indictment; and that this decision be certified to the court below for

observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN , Chief Justice of our Court

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Tyler, this the 12 th d ay of Ma y , 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By:

_______________________________ Chief Deputy Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1370 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1370

 To amend title 23, United States Code, to adequately fund bridges in 
                           the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 19, 2015

 Mr. Blunt (for himself and Mr. Casey) introduced the following bill; 
 which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 23, United States Code, to adequately fund bridges in 
                           the United States.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Support for Bridges Act''.

SEC. 2. RESTORATION OF FUNDING FOR BRIDGES ON FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS.

    (a) National Highway Performance Program.--Section 104(b)(1) of 
title 23, United States Code, is amended by striking ``63.7 percent'' 
and inserting ``49 percent''.
    (b) Surface Transportation Program.--Section 104(b)(2) of title 23, 
United States Code, is amended by striking ``29.3 percent'' and 
inserting ``44 percent''.

SEC. 3. BRIDGES NOT ON FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS.

    Section 133(g) of title 23, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``highway'' the first 
        place it appears; and
            (2) in paragraph (2)(A)--
                    (A) by striking ``2013'' and inserting ``2016''; 
                and
                    (B) by striking ``except that amounts allocated 
                under subsection (d) shall not be obligated'' and 
                inserting ``except that amounts allocated under 
                subsection (d)(1)(A) shall not be used''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.1

 

ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE

TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

 

Effective February 1, 2011, Kim Korth (“Executive”) entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) with Supreme Industries, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Supreme Indiana Operations, Inc. (collectively referred to as “Companies”).

 

Section 2 of the Agreement provides for a six-month initial term ending on August 1, 2011.  The parties to the Agreement are currently engaged in negotiations which may lead to Executive receiving a long-term Employment Agreement.  For this reason, it is necessary to amend the Agreement as follows:

 

1.             Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby amended so as to provide a one month extension (the “Extension Month”) of the Agreement from August 1, 2011 to September 1, 2011.

 

2.             Section 4.2 of the Agreement is hereby amended so as to provide that Executive’s compensation for the Extension Month will be $40,000 instead of $50,000.

 

3.             Section 4.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended so as to provide that no monthly stock award will be paid to Executive during the Extension Month.

 

4.             In the event that, by September 1, 2011, the parties have agreed to the terms of a long-term Employment Agreement, the latter will be signed and become effective on September 1, 2011 (thereby superseding and replacing the Agreement).  In the event that, by September 1, 2011, the parties have not agreed to the terms of a long-term Employment Agreement, then the Agreement shall automatically terminate on September 1, 2011, unless the parties mutually agree (in writing) to keep the Agreement in effect (in which event the amendments provided for in paragraphs 1 through 3 above shall lapse, and the provisions contained in Sections 2, 4.2, and 4.3 of the Agreement shall be fully reinstated).

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Addendum Number One to the Agreement to be effective August 1, 2011.

 

	
 
    	
COMPANIES:
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Supreme   Industries, Inc.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:   
    	
/s/   Herbert M. Gardner
    
	
 
    	
Name:   Herbert M. Gardner
    
	
 
    	
Title:   Chairman of the Board
    
				


 











 

	
 
    	
SUPREME   INDIANA OPERATIONS, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:   
    	
/s/   Herbert M. Gardner
    
	
 
    	
Name:   Herbert M. Gardner
    
	
 
    	
Title:   Chairman of the Board
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
EXECUTIVE:
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
/s/   Kim Korth
    
	
 
    	
Kim   Korth
    
				


 

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000889299
<NAME>                        Danskin, Inc.
<CURRENCY>                                 US $
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-START>                      DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-28-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1.00
<CASH>                                1,177,000
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                        16,093,000
<ALLOWANCES>                            938,000
<INVENTORY>                          34,075,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     54,742,000
<PP&E>                                9,292,000
<DEPRECIATION>                        7,721,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       66,940,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                30,183,000
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                  10
<COMMON>                                 60,463
<OTHER-SE>                              740,527
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         66,940,000
<SALES>                             128,145,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    128,145,000
<CGS>                                83,610,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        83,610,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     42,069,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       (43,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    4,721,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      (2,414,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                          2,777,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  (5,191,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                         (5,191,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             (0.86)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 0
        

</TABLE>
#### Bastian vs. The City of Eau Claire.

*November 4*

*November 21, 1882*

*Pleading.*

A complaint alleging that the plaintiff is the owner of lands, describing them, with certain exceptions both of the body of the lands and certain appurtenant rights, and thereafter alleging injuries to “the said premises,” is *held,*on demurrer, to be neither uncertain nor defective.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for *Eau Clavre*County.

Action for injuries to lands and crops by flowage resulting from the obstruction of the Chippewa river by means of a dam erected and maintained by the defendant city. It is further alleged that grain and hay in the plaintiff’s granary and barn, and provisions in his cellar, were destroyed, and that' he incurred expense in removing hay and grain from the submerged buildings and in replacing the same. The defendant demurred to the complaint generally and upon the ground that several causes of action were improperly united, and appealed from an order overruling the demurrer.

*173The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of *Henry H. Hayden.*

Eor the respondent there was a brief by *Frawley, Hendrix & Brooks,*and oral argument by *Mr. Frawley.*

Ortoh, J.

The complaint, in describing the premises, makes certain exceptions, both of the body of the lands and certain appurtenant rights, and thereafter refers to them as “ said premises,” or “ the premises aforesaid,” without noticing the exceptions. This is the only ground of general demurrer. This is strictly the correct manner of pleading, and no more uncertain or defective than such a description with exceptions in a deed, in which all subsequent references are to “said premises,” without noticing the exceptions. Besides, in this complaint there are damages to personal property of the plaintiff charged, which in itself constitutes a good cause of action.

*By the*Oourt.— The order of the circuit court is affirmed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings according to law.