
    JUDGMENTS.
    [Hamilton Circuit Court,
    1901.]
    Smith, Swing and Giffen, JJ.
    Miller and Tafel v. John Mannix et al.
    Where Two Judges do not Agree — .Affirmance.
    Where a judgment is substantially correct and it appears that the judges who heard the case are not exactly agreed as to the points involved, the judgment is affirmed.
    Heard on Error.
    5. A. Miller and Gustav Tafel, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      Wm. L. Avery and Ramsey, Maxwell & Ramsey, contra.
    The judgment in this case as rendered by the court below was for $45,969.64, with costs, etc., against the defendants, John B.' Mannix, assignee of Archbishop Purcell, and H. H. Hoffman and Michael Clements as sureties. Error was claimed on aceouut of the period for which interest was charged, etc.
   Smith, J.

The two judges who heard this case are not exactly agreed as to one or more points involved in the case, and for this reason, and the further one, that in our opinion the judgment of the common pleas was substantially just, it will be affirmed.  