1118 85 NORTHEASTERN REPORTER. and assessment in the above-entitled proceeding. Francis K. Pendleton, Corp. Counsel (John P. Dunn, Theodore Connoly, and Thomas C. Blake, of counsel), for appellant. Thomas F. Conway, Benjamin Trapnell, Joseph A. Flanand Harry G. Smith, for respondents. nery, PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and VANN, WERNER, GRAY HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. and WILLARD BARTLETT, JJ., dissent. WILLIAMS et al., Respondents, v. HATCH, Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 19, 1908.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (117 App. Div. 919, 102 N. Y. Supp. 1150), entered February 6, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action, for an accounting and to recover the proceeds alleged to have been received from the sale of certain parcels of land. Alton B. Parker, for appellant. George C. Miller, for respondents. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. WILLARD BARTLETT, J., absent. WILLIAMS, Respondent, v. WILSON & MCNEAL CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. Sept. 29, 1908.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (111 App. Div. 442, 97 N. Y. Supp. 731), entered March 13, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury in an action to recover for goods alleged to have been sold and delivered. Isaac N. Miller, for appellant. William B. Hurd, Jr., for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HISCOCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. WILMERDING V. et al.. Respondents, POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE CO., Appellant. (Court of Appeals of New York. June 12, 1908.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (118 App. Div. 685, 103 N. Y. Supp. 594), entered April 10, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury in an action to recover money had and received. Edmund L. Mooney and William W. Cook, for appellant. Edwin Blumenstiel, for respondents. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT, VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, and CHASE, JJ., concur. WOLFORD, Respondent, v. NEW YORK (Court CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant. March 31, 1908.) of Appeals of New York. Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (118 App. Div. 553, 102 N. Y. Supp. 1008), entered March 11, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received through defendant's negligence. Alexander H Cowie, for appellant. Charles P. Wortman and Theodore E. Hancock, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. VANN CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HIS COCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. WOODMANCY, Appellant, v. WOODMANCY et al., Respondents. (Court of Appeals of New York. May 26, 1908.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Stpreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (113 App. Div. 890, 99 N. Y. Supp. 1151), extered May 9, 1906, affirming a judgment in fvor of defendants entered upon the report of a Frank C referee in an action of partition. Ferguson and Claire S. McGavern, for appel lant. M. B. Jewell, for respondents. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. GRAY, VANN, WILLARD BARTLETT, atë CULLEN, C. J., and CHASE, JJ., concur. WERNER and HISCOCK, JJ., dissent. WRIGHT v. SCHOHARIE VALLEY RY. CO. et al. NEW ENGLAND BRICK CO.. Ap al., Respondents. pellant, v. SIMKINS et March 31 (Court of Appeals of New York. 1908.) Appeal from a judgment of the Apper late Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department (116 App. Div. 542, 101 N. Y. Supp. 801), entered March 12, 1907, affirming a judgment in which relief demanded by the appellant herein was denied, entered upos a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury in an action to foreclose certain mechasics' liens. S. L. Mayham and C. B. Mayham for appellant. Homer Strong, for respondents. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and HAIGHT, VANN. WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT, HIS COCK, and CHASE, JJ., concur. X-RAY STOVE POLISH CO., Appellant, v. (Court of Appeals of WALSH, Respondent. New York. June 12, 1908.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Stpreme Court in the First Judicial Department (114 App. Div. 901, 100 N. Y. Supp. 1151), entered June 20, 1906, affirming a judgment in fa vor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Terz in an action for an injunction to restrain ac alleged infringement of the plaintiff's trade mark. Frederick S. Duncan and William H. Thitchener, for appellant. Ernest G. Stevens. for respondent. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed, with costs. CULLEN, C. J., and GRAY, HAIGHT. VANN, WERNER, WILLARD BARTLETT. and CHASE, JJ., concur. YOUNG, Respondent, v. HERRMANN et al. Appellants. (Court of Appeals of New York May 19, 1908.) Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (119 App. Dis. 445, 104 N. Y. Supp. 72), entered May 6, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff enter ed upon a verdict and an order denying a mo tion for a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received through the negligence of defendants. John C BAKER v. LEFFLER et al. (No. 10,682.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. June 23, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Marion County. Thomas E. Powell and L. B. McNeal, for plaintiff in error. Mouser & Quigley, Crissinger & Guthery, and W. E. Scofield, for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. Grounds stated in journal entry. It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, affirmed for the reason that upon the undisputed facts of this case the plaintiff is found to be guilty of negligence contributing to his own injury; but in affirming this judgment the court does not desire to be understood as approving the charge to the jury on the trial of this case in the court of common pleas. PRICE, C. J., and CREW, SUMMERS, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. BALTIMORE & O. R. CO. v. NEEDY et. al. (No. 10.574.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. March 24, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Fayette County. H. B. Maynard and F. A. Durban, for plaintiff in error. Humphrey Jones, for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, C. J., and PRICE, CREW, SUMMERS, and SPEAR, JJ., concur. BANNING et al. v. FARMERS' & MERCHANTS' NAT. BANK OF MT. VERNON. (No. 10,627.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. June 2, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Knox County. Waight & Moore, for plaintiffs in error. F. V. Owen and Wm. M. Koons, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, CREW, and SPEAR, JJ., con cur. BAYER v. MACHLITE. (No. 10,269.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. Feb. 25, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Franklin County. Gumble & Gumble, for plaintiff in error. Harley M. Snyder and Jesse W. Snider, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, C. J., and PRICE, CREW, SPEAR, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. BECKER et al. v. FREIBERG. (No. 10,605.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. May 19, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Hamilton County. Horstman & Horstman, for plaintiffs in error. A. J. Freiberg, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, CREW, and SPEAR, JJ., concur. BOARD OF COM'RS OF DARKE COUNTY v. WELBOURN et al. (No. 11.007.)_(Supreme Court of Ohio. Error May 19, 1908.) Anderson, to Circuit Court, Darke County. Bowman & Anderson, for plaintiff in error. John C. Clark and Bickel & Baker, for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. PRICE. C. J., and SHAUCK, CREW, SUMMERS, SPEAR, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF CRANBERRY TP. v. REID. (No. 10,591.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. May 12, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Crawford County. Finley & Gallinger, for plaintiff in error. R. U. Miller and G. W. Sheetz, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry. It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed for error in affirming and in not reversing the judgment of the court of common pleas of Crawford county in said cause; and, proceeding to render the judgment which said court of common pleas should have rendered, this court finds that the demurrer to the petition of the plaintiff in said court of common pleas and against the trustees of Cranberry township was and is well taken and should have been sustained, and therefore the overruling of said demurrer and the rendition of a money judgment by said court of common pleas in favor of said plaintiff below was and is erroneous. This court is of opinion that the action of the plaintiff below should have been an action in mandamus to require the said trustees to issue to the plaintiff, if the facts proven by said plaintiff should warrant it, a warrant or bond for the sum of $100 only, as provided by section 3107-1, Rev. St. 1908; but there is no authority in law to ask or receive a money judgment against the township or the trustees thereof, nor is there shown any right of action against the said township or said trustees for any money judgment whatever, either principal or interest. It is therefore considered and adjudged that this cause be remanded to the court of common pleas of Crawford county, with direction to said court to sustain the demurrer of the defendants below to the petition of the plaintiff, and for further proceedings according to law. PRICE, C. J., and SHAUCK, CREW, SUMMERS, SPEAR, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. BOWERS et al. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF FULTON TP. et al. (No. 10.395.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. June 16, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Fulton County. Ham, Ham & Ham and Files & Paxton, for plaintiffs in error. Handy & Wolf, for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. PRICE, C. J., and CREW, SUMMERS, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. BOWERS et al. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF FULTON TP. et al. (No. 10,396.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. June 16, 1908.) E:ror to Circuit Court, Fulton County. Ham, Ham & Ham and Files & Paxton, for plaintiffs in error. Handy & Wilf, for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. The amount of money involved in this proceeding having been voluntarily paid, the petition in error is dismissed. PRICE, C. J., and SHAUCK, CREW, SUMMERS, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. BOWLAND, Treasurer, v. COLE et al. (No. 10.974.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. May 26, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Franklin County. George S. Marshall, City Sol., and John L. Davies, for plaintiff in error. M. L. Boyd, for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment reversed, and judgment for plaintiff in error. Grounds stated in journal entry. It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed at the cost of the defendants in error; and thereupon, this court proceeding to render judgment which the circuit court of said Franklin county should have rendered, it is ordered and adjudged that there is due plaintiff in error on the several assessments as in the answer and cross-petition set forth, and interest thereon, duly levied and assessed on the following lots as the same are more particularly described in the answer and cross-petition herein, the following amounts, to wit: Said lot No. 51, the sum of $296.01, with interest from May 26, 1908; said lot No. 52, the sum of $296, with interest from May 26, 1908; said lot No. 53, the sum of $296, with interest from May 26, 1908. It is therefore considered. adjudged, and decreed by the court that, unless the said defendants in error pay or cause to be paid to said plaintiff in error the said sums aforesaid within three days from the entry of this decree, said real estate be sold for the payment of said assessments and interest thereon, as provided by law. It is further considered and ordered that the plaintiff in error recover of the defendants in error his costs in this court, in the circuit court, and in the court of common pleas expended, to be taxed. The inprovements involved and the assessments made to pay for the same were had under the provisions of what is known in this case as the "Taylor Law," which for the purposes of this case must be considered valid, and that the lien of the assessments under said law con tinues until they are paid. The lien still existing tolls the appropriate remedy for its enforcement. PRICE, C. J., and SHAUCK, SUMMERS, and SPEAR, JJ., concur. BROKENSWORD STONE CO. v. BOARD OF TP. TRUSTEES OF MONROE TP. (No. 10,659.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. June 16 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Licking County, Finley & Gallinger and Kibler & Montgomery. for plaintiff in error. Smythe & Smythe, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, CREW, and SUMMERS. JJ. concur. BROWNE et al. v. CITY OF YOUNGSTOWN. (No. 10.242.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. April 7, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court. Mahoning County. S. M. Thompson, for plaintiffs in error. Frank L. Oesch, City Sol, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. cur. 1122 85 NORTHEASTERN REPORTER. in journal entry. It is ordered and adjudged PRICE, C. J., and SHAUCK, CREW, SUM- CINCINNATI TRACTION CO. v. MILLER. (No. 10,688.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. June 16, 1908.) Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati. Outcalt & Hickenlooper, for plaintiff in error. Hoffman, Bode & Le Blond and B. H. Stites, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. CITIZENS' GAS LIGHT & COKE CO. v. SALVATION ARMY. (No. 10,538.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. March 31, 1908.) Error to CirMcConica & cuit Court, Hancock County. Dwiggins, for plaintiff in error. Poe & Poe, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment reversed, for reasons stated in journal entry. This court, proceeding to render the judgment which the circuit court should have rendered, hereby reverses the judgment of said court of common pleas for error in refusing to charge the jury as requested by plaintiff in error, said charge being on page 150 of the printed record of this case; also for error committed in the general charge to the jury on page 151 of the printed record. It is therefore considered by this court that said cause be remanded to the court of common pleas for new trial and for further proceedings according to law. SHAUCK, C. J., and PRICE, SUMMERS, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. (No. CITY OF CINCINNATI v. HICKEY. 10,358.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. May 26, 1908.) Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati. Jesse Lowman, City Sol., and Walter A. De Camp, Charles J. Fitzgerald, for for plaintiff in error. defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment of superior court, general term, reversed, and that of superior court, special term, affirmed, on finding of facts made by the jury. PRICE, C. J., and SHAUCK, SUMMERS, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. Ellis G. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, C. J., and CREW and SPEAR, PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, C. J., and PRICE, CREW, SUMMERS, SPEAR, and DAVIS, JJ., concur. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. CITY OF SALEM v. ESTILL. (No. 10.522.) (Supreme Court of Ohio. March 10, 1908.) Error to Circuit Court, Columbiana County. C. F. Smith, City Sol., and Lewis P. Metzger, for W. S. Emmons and W. G. plaintiff in error. Horstman Wells, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed. SHAUCK, C. J., and PRICE, CREW, SUMMERS, and SPEAR, JJ., concur. CITY OF CINCINNATI et al. v. ROEGGE CITY OF CINCINNATI v. VON BARGEN, CITY OF TOLEDO v. TOLEDO, ST. L. & |