
    M. F. Diesel, Defendant in Error, v. G. J. Diesel, Plaintiff in Error.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of St. Clair county; the Hon. Geobge A. Cbow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed November 13, 1916.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by M. F. Diesel, plaintiff, against Gr. J. Diesel, defendant, to recover damage's for the alienation of affections of the plaintiff’s wife. To review a judgment for plaintiff for $3,500, defendant prosecutes a writ of error.
    William H. Pfingsten and C. H. Gr. Heinfelden, for plaintiff in error.
    Sohaumleffel & Johnson, for defendant in error.
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Husband and wife, § 280
      
      —When decree of divorce is admissible in action for alienation of ■ affections. In an action for the alienation .of affections of the plaintiff’s wife where one defense was that the plaintiff had by his cruelty and atitfee alienated his wife’s affections and that such alienation was not caused by the actions of defendant, held that a decree granting a divorce to the plaintiff’s wife containing a finding that the plaintiff had been guilty of extreme and repeated cruelty towards his wife was admissible.
    2. Husband and wife—when instruction in action for alienation of affections of mfe is erroneous. In an action for the alienation of" affections of plaintiff’s wife, an instruction that “The jury are instructed that if you find for the plaintiff, in estimating the injury he has sustained, you have a right to take into consideration the wounded feelings and affections of the husband, if any,the wrong done to him in his domestic and social relations, if any, the stain and dishonor he has sustained, if any, the grief and affliction suffered in consequence of the act complained of, if any, and give damages accordingly," held erroneous as not confining the jury to the evidence.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.  