
    Moore, Respondent, vs. Turner, Appellant.
    1. On the-trial of appeals from justices of the peace, declarations of law must he asked and exceptions or the supreme court will not interfere.
    
      Jlppieal from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court.
    
    In this case, which was commenced before a justice, the court below found the facts and declared the law arising upon them, according to the practice under the new code. No instructions were ashed and no exceptions taken. After a judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant moved for a review of the law and evidence, which being overruled, he excepted and appeals to this court.
    
      W. R. Biddlecome, for appellant.
    
      Knox Kellogg, for respondent.
   Ryland, Judge.

In this case, no instructions were asked by the defendant on the trial of the appeal in the law commissioner’s court — no exceptions saved to any act of the court previous to giving judgment for the plaintiff.

This court will not reverse the judgment in such cases. In .trials before the law commissioner’s court, upon appeals from a justice’s court, the practice has been to ask instructions where you wish the court to give its views of the law of the case, and to save exceptions to those matters in which, as the parties think, error may have been committed.

Nothing, then, being saved properly, in this case, the judgment must be affirmed,

Judge Scott concurring; Judge Gamble not sitting.  