New Jersey. Dale v. See, 51 N. J. L. 378, 14 Am. St. Rep. 688, 5 L. R. A. 583, 18 Atl. 306.

New York. Bostwick v. Ry., 45 N. Y. 712; Guillaume v. General Transportation Co., 100 N. Y. 491, 3 N. E. 489.

Texas. Missouri, etc., Ry. Co. v. Carter, 9 Tex. Civ. App. 677, 29 S. W. 565.

• Murray v. Miller, 112 Ark. 227, 166 S. W. 536.

9 Anderson v. Timberlake, 114 Ala. 377, 62 Am. St. Rep. 105, 22 So. 431; Pinkerton v. Hudson, 87 Ark, 506, 113 S. W. 35.

10 Anderson v. Timberlake, 114 Ala. 377, 62 Am. St. Rep. 105, 22 So. 431.

11 Pinkerton v. Hudson., 87 Ark. 506, 113 S. W. 35.

12 Templin v. Hobson, 10 Colo. App. 525, 51 Pac. 1019.

13McKone v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 131 Wis. 243, 110 N. W. 472.

14McCorraack v. Bank (Ariz.), 52 Pac. 469.

15Roberts v. Bank, 8 N. D. 474, 79 N. W. 993 [citing, Ayres v. R. R., 52 la. 478, 3 N. W. 522; Royal v. Lindsay, 15 Kan. 591; Kellogg v. Ohn-stead, 25 N. Y. 189; Parmelee v. Thompson, 45 N. Y. 58, 6 Am. Rep. 33].

16 Robinson v. Ry. Co., 135 U. S. 522, 34 L. ed. 276.

17Boney v. Williams, 55 N. J. Eq. 691, 38 Atl. 189.

18Mukey v. Britt, 174 S. W. 1193 [reported without opinion, in 117 Ark. 656].

19 Johnson v. Washburn, 98 Ala, 258, 13 So. 48.

20 Wheat v. Bank, 119 Cal. 4, 50 Pac. 842, 51 Pac. 47. Compare Pollock v. Loan Association, 51 S. Car. 420, 04 Am. St. Rep. 683, 29 S. E. 77. To the same effect is Carroll Exchange Bank v. Bank, 58 Mo. App. 17.

21 M. T. Jones Lumber Co. v. Ville-gas, 8 Tex. Civ. App. 669, 28 S. W. 568.

22 Johnson v. Daniels, 62 Vt. 417, 19 Atl. 977 (though the fund assigned was earned by A with B's help).

23Brin v. McGregor (Tex. Civ. App.), 45 S. W. 923.

24 Summers v. Vaughan, 35 Ind. 323, 9 Am. Rep. 741; Fletcher v. Nelson, 6 N. D. 94, 69 N. W. 53.

25Whitson v. Fowlkes, 38 Tenn. (1 Head.) 533, 73 Am. Dec. 184.

26 Howard v. McNeil (Ky.), 78 S. W. 142; Bull v. Payne, 47 Or. 580, 84 Pac. 697.

27 Litttepage v. Neale Publishing Co.j 34 D. C. App. 257; Parrott v. Mexican Central Ry. Co., 207 Mass. 184, 93 N. E. 590.

28Kimbro v. Wells, 112 Ark. 126, 165 S. W. 645; Hauber v. Leibold, 76 Neb. 706, 107 N. W. 1042; Cleaver v. Lenhart, 182 Pa. St. 285, 37 Atl. 811; Zanturjian v. Boornazian, 25 R. I. 151, 55 Atl. 199.

29Kimbro v. Wells, 112 Ark. 126, 165 S. W. 646.

30 Brawn v. Lyford, 103 Me. 362, 69 Atl 544.

31 Elmore v. Snow, 102 Ark. 592, 146 S. W. 470.

32 Utah Savings & Trust Co. v. Bamberger, 29 Utah 370, 81 Pac. 887.

33 Morningstar v. Stratton, 121 Ala. 437, 25 So. 573.

34Widiman v. Brown, 83 Mich. 241, 47 N. W. 231.

35 Mitchell v. Bell, Conf. Rep. (N. Car.) 17, 2 Am. Dec. 627.

36 Smith v. Knight, 86 la. 257, 55 N. W. 180.

37 Shefey v. Brooke, 114 Mich. 11, 72 N. W. 37 (unless the settlement was made by fraud or mistake).

38Widger v. Baxter, 190 Mass. 130, 3 L. R. A. (N.S.) 436, 76 N. E. 509.

39Carstens Packing Co. v. Trough-ton, 90 Wash. 196, 155 Pac. 758.

40Gooch v. Gooch, 70 W. Va. 38, 73 S.E. 56 [sub nomine, Gooch v. Allen, 37 L. R. A. (N.S.) 930].

41 Marsh v. Chown, 104 la. 566, 73 N. W. 1046. See Banning v. Purinton, 105 la. 642, 75 N. W. 639.

42 Monroe v. Martin, 137 Ga. 262, 73 S. E. 341.

43 Graham v. Alexander, 123 Mich. 168, 81 N. W. 1084.

44 Carson v. Clark, 1 III. (1 Scam.) 113, 25 Am. Dec. 79; Boston v. Dodge, 1 Blackf. (Ind.) 19, 12 Am. Dec. 206; Frear v. Hardenbergh, 5 Johns. (N. T.) 272, 4 Am. Dec. 366; Perkins Estate, 65 Vt. 313, 26 Atl. 637.

ing into possession, to pay for prior repairs made by a lessee with his consent or instructions.45 A promise by a landlord after the lease is given,46 or contracted for,47 to repair the premises leased is void; and so is a promise to reduce the rent,48 or a promise by a tenant after a lease is made to allow the landlord to seize the tenant's goods for rent before due,49 or a promise by the owner of realty to pay to the owners of an option all expenses incurred by them in boring, where the holders of such option have already been reimbursed therefor by a third person.10 An assignment for the benefit of creditors and a composition deed are not considerations for a subsequent promise by a creditor, who was not a party to these transactions and who took no rights thereunder, to accept less than the amount admittedly due in full satisfaction of his debt.51 The rendition of services by a railway company's physician is no consideration for a subsequent promise by an injured employe to release his claim for damages.52

An attempted ratification of a forged instrument is without consideration where no new rights have been acquired in reliance thereon.53 After a franchise has been given to a street railway company which does not require the company to pave part of the street, an oral contract by such company to pay for such paving can not be supported by the prior grant of the franchise as a con-sideration.54

45 Bedell v. Tracy, 65 Vt. 494, 26 Atl. 1031.

46Roehrs v. Timmons, 28 Ind. App. 578, 63 N. E. 481; Clyne v. Helmes, 61 N. J. L. 358, 39 Atl. 767; Peticolas v. Thomas, 9 Tex. Civ. App. 442, 29 S. W. 166.

47Averill v. Sawyer, 62 Conn. 560, 27 Atl. 73.

48Goldsborough v. Gable, 140 Hit. 269, 15 L. R. A. 294, 29 N. E. 722.

49Brayfield v. Cardiff, 9 Manitoba (Can.) 302.

50 Williams v. Moore, 192 Pa. St. 211, 43 Atl. 1022.

51 Daniels v. Hatch, 21 N. J. L. 391, 47 Am. Dec. 169.

52 Kennedy v. Spokane P. & S. Ry. Co., 73 Wash. 389, 46 L. R. A. (N.S.) 419, 132 Pac. 50. (This holding was based on the theory that the services were gratuitous, and that if the railway company were negligent, it was bound to furnish such services.)

53 Arizona. Barry v. Kirkland, 6 Ariz. 1, 40 L. R. A. 471, 52 Pac. 771.

Indiana. Henry v. Heeb, 114 Ind. 275, 5 Am. St. Rep. 613, 16 N. E. 606.

Kentucky. Owsley v. Philips, 78 Ky. 517, 39 Am. Rep. 258.

Ohio. Workman v. Wright, 33 O. S. 405, 31 Am. Rep. 546; Shinew v. First Nat'l Bank, 84 O. S. 297, 36 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1006, 95 N. E. 881.

Pennsylvania. McHugh v. County of Schuylkill, 67 Pa. St. 391, d Am. Rep. 445; Second Nat'l Bank v. Went-zel, 151 Pa. St. 142, 24 Atl. 1087; Henry Christian Bldg. & Loan Association v. Walton, 181 Pa. St. 201, 59 Am. St. Rep. 636, 37 Atl. 261.

Contra, Hefner v. Vandolah, 62 111. 483, 14 Am. Rep. 106; Central National Bank v. Copp, 184 Mass. 328, 68 N. E. 334; Corser v. Paul, 41 N. H. 24, 77 Am. Dec. 753.