#### Claude B. Davis, Defendant in Error, v. Max J. Strauch and Wilhelmina Strauch, Plaintiffs in Error.

Gen. No. 18,079.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Mazzini Slusser, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1912.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 15, 1913.

*452Abstract of the Decision.

1. Appeal and bebop, § 866 * —what abstract must contain. A purported abstract which is a mere index of the record is wholly insufficient to present questions for review.

2. Appeal and ebbob, § 787*—when bill of exceptions is necessary. A bill of particulars and certain motions and affidavits which appear in a record can only he properly preserved hy a hill of exceptions.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Claude B. Davis, trading as Claude B. Davis & Company, against Max J. Straueh and Wilhelmina Straueh. From a judgment for plaintiffs for two hundred and eight dollars, defendant brings error.

Daniel V. Harkin and Dillard B. Baker, for plaintiffs in error.

Gteorge M. Stevens, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XIV, same topic and section number.

Mb. Justice Baume

delivered the opinion of the court.