#### John T. Pierson v. Mary Watters.

Practice — Billon exceptions. — There being no hill of exceptions properly signed in the record, and no suggestion of a diminution of the record, the presumption is that the original bill of exceptions was not signed, and the judgment will be affirmed.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Iroquois countythe Hon. Franklin Blades, Judge, presiding.

Opinion filed December 4, 1880.

Mr. I. W. Howland, for appellant.

Mr. James Fletgher, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

In this record there is no bill of exceptions signed and sealed by the judge who tried the cause, and no suggestion of a diminution of the record having been made, the presumption is that the original bill of exceptions was not signed. Miller v. Jenkins, 44 Ill. 443.

In such case we cannot consider what is copied into the the record as a bill of exceptions to be any part of the record. Reeves v. Reeves, 54 Ill. 332.

. The judgment will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.