The Birmingham age-herald., 1903-03-26
Opinions Rendered
 By Supreme Court

coeeiola ct al. vs. Wood -Dickerson Sup
 ply Company.-Bfl in Equity to Have
 Declared and Enforced a Material
 Mans Lien.-Appeal from the City
 Court of Birmingham, in Equity
 L Material-Man's Lien; Construction of Statute; Lien can be Declared on Sev- eral Buildings Situated on One Lot-The provision of the act approved March 4 190l relating to liens of mechanics and material-men in the county of Jefferson that when the Improvements consist of two or more buildings united together and situated upon the same lot or con tigous lots, or on separate buildings upon contiguous lots, and erected under one general contract, it shall not be nec- essary to file a separate lien on each building for the work done and materials furnished in the erection of such improvement" (Acts of 19O0-1901 p. 2l15), applys to cases where materials are fur nished for the erection of separate houses on the same lot, under one general con tract; and under said statute, the ma terial-man who has furnished material to be used in several houses being erect ed on one lot under one general contract, can obtain the benefit of the law by claiming only one lien upon all the houses for the material so furnished,
 Affirmed Opinion by Dowdell, J.
 Davis vs. Alexander City-Action Against
 Municipal Corporation for Damages
 for Personal Injuries Caused by De-
 feet in Street.-Appeal from the Cir
 cult Court of Tallapoosa.
 1. Action Against Municipal Corpora ton for Damages Arising from Defect in Streets What Necessary to Maintain Action.-To maintain an action against a municipal corporation to recover dam ages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused from a defective con- dition of the streets, the plaintiff must aver and prove not only the existence of the defect in the street as alleged in his complaint, but also that the defendant had actual or constructive notice Of IL at the time of the injury complained of.
 9. Action Against Municipal Corpora tion for Defective Streets.-ln an action against a municipal corporation to re- cover damages for personal injuries al- legged to have been caused by defect in the streets of the defendant, evidence that several days after the accident com plained of another person fell at the same place is inadmissible and incompe- tent in the absence of testimony show ing the similarity of the condition of the defect at the subsequent date and at the time of the injury complained of by plaintiff.
 8. Same; Evidence as to Subsequent Condition of Street Inadmissible-In such an action, testimony as to the condition Of the street some days subsequent to the date that the plaintiff was hurt is inadmissble In the absence of all proof that such condition remained unchanged after the date of the injury.
 f. Argument of Counsel to Jury; When Improper-In an action against munich pal corporation to recover damages Tor personal injuries, alleged to have been caused by defective condition of the de- the plaintiffs attorney in his argument to the jury that Doubtless, gentlemen you know that you cannot get in trouble any quicker than to go to a little town like Alexander City and say something against the condition of the town to some of the city officials, transeends the bounds of legitimate argument, and upon objection on the part of the defendant is properly excluded from the jury; such argument being based upon a fact which was not in evidence, and which was not and could not be legally competent and admissible as evidence. Affirmed. Opinion by Tyson, J.
 McGough vs. MeGough-Petition in Chan
 cery for Custody of Children-Appeal