
    James Allen, petitioner for increase of damages, vs. Androscoggin Railroad Company.
    
      Practice. Damages — increase of.
    
    By B. S., c. 18, § 12, it is made the duty of the person presiding at the -view and hearing hy a jury, in the assessment of damages for land taken for a railroad, to ‘ certify to the court, with the verdict, the substance of any decision or instruction hy him given, when any party shall request it.’
    When a party does not request the person presiding to certify Ms rulings, he thereby waives all right of exception, and cannot prove the rulings hy calling, as a witness, the person who presided.
    On excextions.
    This case came before this court on the return of the proceedings had before a jury impannelled to assess damages for land taken by the defendants for their railroad, with the report of the evidence and the verdict of the jury. • '
    The report, .signed by the presiding officer, certifies no party requested him to certify any rulings made by him.
    
      The respondents offered to prove, by the presiding officer, what rulings he gave the jury; but the presiding justice excluded the offered testimony, and thereupon the defendants alleged exceptions.
    
      H. L. Whitcomb, for the petitioner.
    
      Belcher & Belcher, for the respondents.
   Appleton, C. J.

It is made the duty of the person presiding, ‘to instruct the jury upon any question of law when requested by either party; and certify to the court, with' the verdict, the substance of any decision or instruction by him given, when either party shall request it.’ R. S., c. 18, § 12. But without request he is not obliged to do it. Nor can the petitioner prove his decisions or instructions, subsequently, by calling him as a witness. The petitioner not having, at the hearing, requested the decisions or instructions given to be certified, has waived all right of exception. Exceptions overruled.

Cutting, Walton, Dickerson, and Danforth, JJ., concurred.  