"Whereas, the Springfield Traction Company, by its petition, has represented to us, to wit, that on the 10th day of August, 1905, it being the August term of the circuit court of Polk county, Mo., there was pending in the circuit court of Polk county, Mo., a certain cause in which one Mahala H. Cramer was plaintiff and the said the Springfield Traction Company was defendant, and that on said the 10th day of August, 1905, a verdict therein was returned in favor of said Mahala H. Cramer, plaintiff, and against said the Springfield Traction Company, and that thereafter, at and during the said August term, 1905, of said Polk county circuit court, and within four days after the return of said verdict, to wit, on August 12, 1905, the said the Springfield Traction Company filed its motion for a new trial therein, setting forth therein errors alleged to have been committed in the trial of said cause, and that on the same day, to wit, August 12, 1905, and during the said August term, 1905, and within four days after the rendition of and return of the verdict therein, the said the Springfield Traction Company filed its motion in arrest of judgment, assigning and setting forth in said motion alleged errors in the trial and alleged defects in the petition, and matters showing said judgment to be void as alleged and claimed by said defendant; that thereafter, to wit, on September, 28, 1905, it being the said August term, 1905, of said circuit court of Polk county, Mo., the said motion for a new trial was by the said circuit court heard and was on said day overruled, to which ruling defendant objected and excepted at the time, and that on the same day, to wit, September 28, 1905, and it being the August term, 1905, of said Polk county circuit court, the said motion in arrest was by the said court heard, and was on said date, September 28, 1905, overruled, to which ruling defendant objected and excepted at the time; that thereupon, on the same day, to wit, September 28, 1905, and during the said August term, 1905, of said Polk county circuit court, the said the Springfield Traction Company filed its affidavit for appeal, and that said appeal on said day was allowed by said circuit court of Polk county, Mo., by its order duly entered of record, and which record entry is as follows, to wit: `Now on this day comes the defendant, and files its affidavit for appeal, and all and singular being seen, heard, and fully understood, the said appeal is allowed, and said defendant is granted an appeal to the Kansas City Court of Appeals, and it is further ordered that the defendant have until and including the first day of the next regular term of this court in which to
file its exceptions' — that on the same day, to wit, September 28, 1905, it being the August term, 1905, of said circuit court of Polk county, Mo., the said the Springfield Traction Company filed its bond for appeal and on said day, to wit, September 28, 1905, the said bond was duly approved.
"And, whereas, the said the Springfield Traction Company by its said petition has further represented to us that thereafter, to wit, on the 27th day of November, 1905, it being the first day of the November term, 1905, of the said circuit court of Polk county, Mo., and it being within the time allowed defendant the Springfield Traction Company within which to file its bill of exceptions, the said circuit court of Polk county, Mo., for good cause shown, did by its order of record extend the time for the filing of its said bill of exceptions until and including the 1st day of March, 1906, which order of record is in words as follows: `Now, on this 27th day of November, 1905, the defendant in open court asks that the time be extended within which to file its bill of exceptions, and, all and singular being heard, it is by the court ordered that the time for filing said bill of exceptions be extended, and that the defendant have on and including the 1st day of March, 1906, in which to file the same.'
"And, whereas, the said the Springfield Traction Company, by its said petition, has further represented to us that thereafter, to wit, on the 17th day of February, 1906, it, the said the Springfield Traction Company, presented to Hon. Argus Cox, he being the judge of the said circuit court of Polk county, Mo., its bill of exceptions in said cause, and the said judge, having examined the same, did on said February 17, 1906, allow the same, and did on said February 17, 1906, sign the same, and attach his seal thereto, and by indorsement thereon on said day did direct the clerk of said circuit court of Polk county to file the same; that on said 17th day of February, 1906, the said the Springfield Traction Company did present the said bill of exceptions so allowed, signed, and sealed to the said clerk of said circuit court of Polk county at and in the office of said clerk, and did file said bill of exceptions with said clerk, and that on said date its said clerk made the following endorsement thereon: `In obedience to the order of Hon. Argus Cox, judge, in vacation file this bill of exceptions this 17th day of February, 1906. Luther Hyde, Clerk.'
"And, whereas, it is further represented to us by the said the Springfield Traction Company in its petition so filed with us that on the ____ day of March, 1906, the said the Springfield Traction Company filed with and in the office of the clerk of the Kansas City Court of Appeals a certified copy of the judgment so rendered in the circuit court of Polk county, Mo., and did on said date file with and in the office of the said clerk of the said Kansas City Court of Appeals a certified copy of the order made by the circuit court of Polk county, Mo., allowing said appeal.
"And, whereas, the said the Springfield Traction Company by its petition hath further represented to us as follows: That about the time of granting of said bill of exceptions a stipulation was entered into between counsel for appellant and counsel for respondent in said action as follows: `It is hereby stipulated that any misrecitals in bill of exceptions in this case may be corrected by either party hereto before final submission in Court of Appeals, and any omission may be supplied by either party before said final submission, and any error of facts or files or the dates thereof or any misrecital of any error in or omission of evidence may be supplied by either party hereto before final submission.' That said cause was originally set for the ____ day of April, 1906, it being the April term, 1906, of the said the Kansas City Court of Appeals; that in the month of February, 1906, the counsel for said the Springfield Traction Company, T. J. Delaney, requested of Hon. O. T. Hamlin, counsel for respondent Mahala H. Cramer, that said cause be continued by consent to the October term, 1906, of said Kansas City Court of Appeals, but that said request was refused. That thereupon said T. J. Delaney, in behalf of said the Springfield Traction Company, prepared its abstract of the record and its brief, and on or about the ____ day of March, 1906, as required by law, the appellant, by said T. J. Delaney, delivered to said Hon. O. T. Hamlin a copy of the abstract of the record prepared by appellant, and also delivered to said Hon. O. T. Hamlin a copy of appellant's brief. That on the same day, after said abstract of the record and said brief had been so delivered to said Hon. O. T. Hamlin, the said Hon. O. T. Hamlin pleaded stress of business, and requested a continuance of said cause, which request was granted and by agreement said cause was continued to the October term, 1906, of said Kansas City Court of Appeals.
"And, whereas, it is further represented to us that on the ____ day of ____, 1906, and in compliance with the rules of said court, the said the Springfield Traction Company filed with and in the office of the clerk of said Kansas City Court of Appeals copies of said abstract of the record and copies of the brief of appellant; and that said abstract of the record so filed set forth all that was necessary to an intelligent understanding and proper decision of...
