#### The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph Berg, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 19,539.

(Not to he reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Automobiles and garages, § 1 * —evidence constituting a prima face case of excessive speed. On information charging the driver of an automobile with violating the speed statute, testimony of a witness for the State that the defendant was driving on a boulevard in a residence district at a certain place at twenty-nine miles per hour and at another place at thirty-five miles, and that the automobile was a touring car and not an ambulance, held to make a prima facie case of a violation of the statute, and *485that it devolved upon defendant to overcome it by competent evidence.

*484Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Shebidan E. Fry, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed March 26, 1914.

Statement of the Case.

Information filed in the Municipal Court of Chicago charging Joseph Berg with driving a motor vehicle upon the streets of the city of Chicago at a speed in excess of fifteen miles per hour in violation of section 10 of the Motor Vehicle Act, J. & A. 10010. Defendant pleaded not guilty and a jury returned a verdict finding the defendant guilty. The court entered judgment upon the verdict and further adjudged that the defendant pay a fine of seventy-five dollars and costs, and that in default of such payment that he be committed to the House of Correction. To reverse the judgment, defendant prosecutes error.

Rose, Symmes & Kirkland, for plaintiff in error.

Maclay Hoyne, for defendant in error; Francis E. Hinckley, of counsel.

*

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

Mr. Justice G-ridley

delivered the opinion of the court.

*4852. Automobiles and garages, § 1 * —when evidence sufficient to sustain conviction for excessive speed. On information charging defendant with driving a motor vehicle in excess of fifteen miles per hour in violation of section 10 of the Motor Vehicle Law, J. & A. 1f 10010, held that the question whether the defendant violated the statute was for the jury, and that a finding of guilty was sustained by the evidence, it appearing from the testimony of witnesses on behalf of the People that the defendant was driving at a rate of from twenty-nine to thirty-five miles per hour on a boulevard in the residence portion of the city and defendant’s evidence showing that he was driving in excess of fifteen miles per hour but that his speed was slackened at street intersections and that his automobile was in good condition so that the machine could be stopped at any time within from fifteen to twenty feet.

3. Municipal Court of Chicago, § 17 * —oral instructions. Under section 37 of the Municipal Court Act, J. & A. If 3349, the court may within its discretion instruct the jury orally.

4. Municipal Court of Chicago, § 28 * —necessity of exception to specific portion of oral instruction. Objection that certain portions of an oral charge to the jury cannot be considered where the bill of exceptions does not show an exception to any specific portion thereof.

5. Municipal Court of Chicago, § 17 * —when court may refuse to give written instructions. The Municipal Court may refuse to give to the jury written requested instructions where it has determined to charge the jury orally.