, 1877-02-14

crty. ,uc Al waa II, ccstnry 10 create tic relation
81 % s e .sxss If hs oa Of ass
su!d NIT unless he furnished further mar9inf.
hing contract. So far had been c.tatI. he'd by
the evidence. The trsntactinn WAS mt dcnt In op
e".sa Hn o Sa Ssf se: 70 be Il
future day. and HID tho 1nnsgins beer. Kept gpod
" sos.sM as re9n[s, " tho n,agS. ef ~ Hoard
wond not iavo been !iciivcted ii tic Tina reantc m
y ias ra. sosias. nsn:s Tho Judgment Of tho lower
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAttIloAD COMPANY VI.
riillLIFs.
n ~ e. e'fs q hP % "' Gss6a sss cG H.
coft he" I'll va. ''s su ss.ien to %
the 1s.h. " December, isS7, BY e ths burst. r.
;ng of - ',oiler Of one "! Of dcfendnnts engines
III s w.Has9 s9s sA' ny Ess % ss sv e ct
ticket. and .was thrown down by the couensaton
and injured: 1fo recovered d verdict, bill il was
second lime hs recovered. verdict. sa n II WA
aE rsyssss " r. suPtse cor on ihs ssoufnd
lie reversal at Is for sar rea.on Te spreme
Court thou9Gt thaf,, although tho bafstIn9 of
Io!ler showed pr!n,a faels negligence, ret that pre:
the boiler ,ras in eood condition. viii plenty of
wnter, n1nl IN tho hands Of careful engincer Tint
The aeeideat was Of nn exceptlonn! character and
Company alioul. not be hold iiaoc. ''
TIE Law IN REGARD 70 CONDENSATION rno-
In the ca.e of ssa vi;sse ., 1rsde Park, ap.
pelIant, ". John ii. Danhain and others. Just d.
eided, ihc Supreme Court discuss At cnxtf, the law
preliminary questions were raltcl on the appeal:
Etst that wst VI error won!1 n9t lie n tfe case;
Court disposei Ut there objections very briefly.
holding TINT i WAS nut s.scntIn that tle .tatn!s
es%a ssf fs't o e s x e ts fsf': eat en eo
II could tc prosecuted IN all cascs where The jIdg.
1cnt q decree wns fi,al ss matter Of right. Tho
right Of appeal was but 4 cumulative remedy. II
tho bill of exceptions wa. sfsncd and It was there.
Judge for itlat purpose Ia proper tlnir.
mt object q tha present .uit "a. e s9nsn1n ~
hS nsas s tSs
Soanisd s'S%a1 1 s "a s'fss as0sss .s
III ese se tS ss"s Streets va. Msd,on Asenao
l,ark There wers two t'ers of lots eeewcen ,,
Ut sitset W. anly ono icr, ii5 fest deep, viii
front either north 9r tont accorilnpn tc owners
strert Tho street to be wiencl, and 1t wns pfo-
posed 10 cut seventeen feet of tho souh IND Ut tho
o % 1;s fst ,s s' .rt on. GSsetS 5 ,Is'
was tint tho Court erred in compelling It to
enter IN IT, proof a. to T., , ths question
VI tuJEECd 10 ~ vltEcH v! lALlt NUt kHhEH
Ly lilo psoporcu Improvement and not mentioned
III tho 1etttun. aud to Which i claimed no damage
wa* dune. Gcrore lunun had given any Testimony
IN fayor oi thu clAM ma.le In tho crosa.t,ctttlon:
namely. that other, property had been damaged
t!un lint mentioned ~ ,is petition. The Supreme
t,e tuwn el,olA aso proved IT, own clsc, then a.
lo"ad t!ie defendant t9 lntrodueu ,teat!Mony IN
hs e. sns aI d ts .ss
q bH' und cross-bil In ehnnccry. Even
thonri. ~ . matter u fact NJ damaacM! y wcrs W r
lie petttson. Xiii esaneu WI Ir3necd IN r..
gnrti 10 tho daa:azo dune u property not taken,
mud was inI'us4bc u say that snct evidence dla
nut In toae degree alcct tne verdict OF the jury.
sni il sael essu. trivial eircu,,!aace. ofien 1sa
st 81 S Il xis as
III rcXht.E to the fois IN question. there was no
controsersy as TO TIC salue of tl'e sevrneen teet
nrtnn}iy tnken, nnd theru wrro but Two ways W
ssi"aly tske% % j. da'ecear.t' y iaue'as @
aru taken Lelow n desirable limit; md, secondly,
80 than siadtsu GNscaur Paii. anl thereby In
with tho tsepts ot rc.1dauccs: The la,tet. q
thu seventeen feet wure talcn, but II might affect
tho lois 1H TIE s,orth side of Madison Avulue Futk
" nnsns S RsisSS,ooa a, te park less
MH @ asfs'Ss Is ns fsss st ta I'LL!
H.
rsa.Sa iSrsiss ~ csS isye ,1.stissly tat itt.
ssy sys ssus Il ssss q sy = -
woa ns Il III! ~ ss ,sy s.
y n W ts sy!dcl,cSs and xhe Il
s''fsl''''ss IT, X 'hs ''a'pa suseps It
s g ss5 sa { sse y
SIS ss! e t..ix az xi;,, Tnsr q; Gt,t4toa
IL i patent 10 th4 UsaFs VI all tiAt td kaklx uf
ass sc ss r.
snd 1t ~ I'LL lily 4s aYo ; ~ eaa ~
tv ttY4InE tal! I. not :uc! Hsaxs = .no9lJ 4
sx q AZ d9m3fa
q .s ~ p:r, Ii
; f 4 s .;I taKs Y 4
n. Iapefxa ~ tv!st!.s $a.ue q IL issst,y.
eJas a sa
sksn IL citi Of ss xaeetoTa v: Ma.pn sjuIo, ;sri
ssis :4 vs.
y
~ j ii. *,5ss: 'ss so
rse. ts'tr. " % spssa isasa. ~ y
Eitssxs. upon tlls ot.o*nrF tenln1 y iavtr4Ao ls
= VI: sas = s
ii @ IL I ~ ass IT, SiyS
;ss 'n:;:ss's1: :fsa sss r.
llf5 arc (nst ructc1 !iat lu estimating
compensation ur l1a1 tkktM by thu FtuI1scit ipyuYr.
iae4ts A!4 IN est1n.au4 uAnaHe1 ~ tla part4 " tte
lots not tAScn aud tu other o:A part Vi whtyh nj
!Aktn general Atlelts II ay. FgsuttIx tu all UrUprr,
tyuwtfa ~ Tue Ytcln9ty arc nst " bv tskrI tu
counti tlsAgr eau tu luFy takJ in1u s1aslcfatl N
ehtGa! ltnslta II Any. EcE lhvy lnsY Istteta viii
accrue to tts LOIS Or Dats VI lots 1t utfguiaAs-pn.
Aaiu 9hl Flt1K.fstu-faketl. = '--'-7
"Ikttt-IIu Jury ars Instructed that Ia detes1otu,
Ing tht tust compensation ~ u Iade Ills taking III
rs s%f 1t 4 Z Whit Il Z sHs II
not ~ evsldef nay oene IL u. wIlc tavy
may btllHtt HA1 lots tAr4 lots ihp uwtiCti
!asfeof Will susa!a by Fessv Ut th5 prpiAsgd wlISn,
lA1 pf Est streGt. LIE Aw h4ying prut iuri lal
.IStI t Huh's aud advantages shall bc ID.
teF1ueIs alld a4scksri IN al1tsr proceedings and ~.
on aLoltt di!!ervnt occa.! u tL4u flv prsscut
lien l1structtoalt will 10 sGe1, nus III harmony
wh ens S,sma auote eAtrs5 e .let they telulFs lis
~ " " thg pF.tsrty n"t xru.
Ihu ,efcnt4 usiruclon Ryrn 1t t4s instance OF the
aeLsL0 4Hka a!rsu Has lh4t
~. n G fs juty Ixtrss from tho evidence tla,
fSsss y r Il dssss X ~ ystsaAaAss aSssl
ss.t @ .rsst; @ tef x = 4 suL ststs e tets Verdict
v taxing ~ ssttHlGea teat IRON sul1 kirf al luts
- uuAlIans 6ului ix!uA."
TAl4 Ii psrlIay hAsea uron whss va haYs
Icfoin 44ds4 to - ~ ssttni nlus W wAtc property