#### City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Charles Murphy, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 19,715.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Municipal cokpobations, § 864 * —when proof of venue insufficient to sustain conviction for violation of ordinance. A conviction for a violation of a gambling ordinance cannot be sustained where the only proof of the venue was that the gambling took place at “3036 South State street,” and there was nothing in the record to show that the street was located in the city alleged.

2. Evidence, § 14*—judicial notice of location of streets. Courts of this State will not take judicial notice that certain streets mentioned in the record are located in any particular city.

Error to the Municipal Court of .Chicago; the Hon. John A. Mahoney, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed October 6, 1914.

Statement of the Case.

Prosecution by the City of Chicago against Charles Murphy in which the defendant was convicted on the charge of being connected with the management and operation of premises in the City of Chicago, kept for the purpose of permitting persons to gamble in violation of an ordinance of said City. To reverse the judgment, defendant prosecutes érror.

Edward H. Morris, for plaintiff in error.

William: H. Sexton and James S. McInerney, for defendant in error; Albert J. W. Appell, of counsel.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vol». XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.