
    John Schultz v. The Bear Creek Refining Company, Limited, Appellant.
    
      Practice S. 0. — Appeals—Interlocutory order — Arbitration.
    An appeal to the Supreme Court does not lie from an order refusing to strike off an appeal from arbitrators, as such an order is merely interlocutory.
    Argued Feb. 12, 1896.
    Appeal, No. 157, July T., 1895, by defendant, from order of C. P. Delaware Co., Sept. T., 1894, No. 170, discharging rule to strike off appeal from award of arbitrators.
    Before Williams, McCollum, Mitchell, Dean and Fell, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Rule to strike off appeal taken by plaintiff from the award of arbitrators. The court discharged the rule.
    
      
      .'Error assigned was order discharging rule.
    
      V. Gilpin Robinson, Alfred Driver with him, for appellant.
    
      W. B. Broomall, for appellee, was not heard.
    March 9, 1896 :
   Per Curiam,

We are not aware of any statute that gives a right of appeal from an order refusing to strike off an appeal from arbitrators. None has been brought to our attention. The order is interlocutory. The cause is still pending and may be brought to trial at the will of either party. For this reason the appeal is dismissed.  