
    HENRY G. HARRISON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. EDWARD S. TINKER, Defendant and Respondent.
    VALUE OF SERVIOES.
    Architect.—Action by to recover the value of services. Plaintiff claimed that there was an usual and customary rate of compensation for the services of an architect, and introduced evidence to show that such rate was five per cent, on the cost of the building.
    
      Wvidence in rebuttal.—Held, that defendant, for the' purpose of showing that the rates weie not uniform, might prove the highest price Tie had ever paid for the same kind of work performed by the plaintiff, the highest as well as the lowest cost of any house built by him, and what the services of an architect paid for by him included.
    
      Before Freedman and Speir, JJ.
    
      Heard August 6, 1875;
    
      Decided December 6, 1875.
   Freedman, J.,

wrote for affirmance, laying down above proposition.

Speir, J., concurred.  