#### Chicago & W. I. R. R. Co. v. DeMarko.

1. Bill of Exceptions—Must be Sealed.—It is indispensable that a bill of exceptions be sealed as well as signed by the judge who certifies to the same.

Memorandum.—Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1893, and affirmed.

Opinion filed February 1, 1894.

The statement of facts is contained in the opinion of the court.

Osborn & Lynde, attorneys for appellant.

Whitehead & Stoker, attorneys for appellee.

Mr. Justice Waterman

delivered the opinion of the Court.

*582In the common law record of this case we find no error. We can not consider that portion of the transcript sought to be made a record by a bill of exceptions, because the so-called bill of exceptions was not sealed as well as signed by the judge who certified thereto.

It is indispensable that a bill of exceptions be signed and sealed by the judge by whom the same is made. Widows and Orphans’ Beneficiary Association v. Powers, 30 Ill. App. 82; Clive v. The Toledo, St. Louis & Kansas R. R. Co., 41 Ill. App. 516; Miller v. Jenkins, 44 Ill. 443; James v. Sprague, 2 Scam. 55; Mason v. Gibson, 13 Ill. App. 463; Morse v. Williams, 4 Scam. 285; Cowhick v. Gunn, 2 Scam. 417.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.