In an action to recover commissions on a sale or exchange of real estate, where the plaintiff describes himself in his statement of claim "'as a dealer in real and personal property and in the regular course of business" made the sale or exchange in question, and it is admitted that plaintiff had not taken out a license as required by law, the statement of claim is admissible as evidence tending to show that the plaintiff is a real estate broker, and where the statement is supported by the evidence of two witnesses called by the defendant it is error for the court to give binding instructions for plaintiff. Sprague v. Reilly, 34 Pa. Super. Ct. 332.