ART. 5.] APPEALS FROM COURTS OF LAW. 19

Md. 301. Hamilton v. State, 32 Md. 354. Worthington v. Tormey, 34 Md.
182. Norris v. Wrenschall, 34 Md. 492. Gabelien v. Plaenker, 36 Md. 61.
Strauss v. Young, 36 Md. 246. Schley v. Merritt, 37 Md. 352. Stansbury v.
Fogle, 37 Md. 369. A. & E. R. R. Co. v. Gantt, 39 Md. 115. Davis v. State,
39 Md. 355. Gent v. Ensor, 41 Md. 24. B. & O. R. R. Co. v. Woodward, 41
Md. 268. Balto. Building Asso. v. Grant, 41 Md. 560. Newman v. McComas,
43 Md. 70. Scarlett v Academy of Music, 43 Md. 203. Cockey v. Ensor, 43
Md. 266. Third Nat. Bank v. Boyd, 44 Md. 47. Stillman v. Dougherty, 44
Md. 380. Grove v. Schwartz, 45 Md. 227. Broll v. State, 45 Md. 356.
McKnew v Duvall, 45 Md 501. Scarlett v. Academy of Music, 46 Md. 153
Keene v. Van Reuth, 48 Md. 184. Franklin v. Claflin, 49 Md. 24. Mondell
v. Shafer, 49 Md. 492. Hearn o Gould, 51 Md. 321. Reier v. Strauss, 54 Md.
291. Eckenrode v. Chemical Co , 55 Md. 66 Coward v Dillinger, 56 Md. 61.
Ecker v. First Nat. Bank, 62 Md. 519. Dwyer v. State, 65 Md. 278. B. & O.
R. R. Co. v. Mali, 66 Md. 56. McCullough v. Biedler, 66 Md. 283. Albert v.
State, 66 Md. 334. Jackson v. Commrs, of Salisbury, 66 Md. 460. Shipley v.
Shilling, 66 Md. 565. Thorne v. Fox, 67 Md 74.

Rule B.

10. Bills of exceptions shall be so prepared as only to present
to the court of appeals the rulings of the court below upon some
matter of law, and shall contain only such statement of facts as
may be necessary to explain the bearing of the rulings upon the
issues or questions involved; and if the facts are undisputed,
they shall be stated as facts, and the evidence from which they
are deduced shall not be set out; and if disputed, it shall be
sufficient to state that evidence was adduced tending to prove
them, instead of setting out the evidence in detail; but if a defect
of proof be the ground of the ruling or exception, then the par-
ticulars in which the proof is supposed to be defective shall be
briefly stated, and all the evidence offered in anywise connected
with such supposed defect, shall be set out in the bill of excep-
tion ; and it shall be the duty of the judges in the courts below
to require exceptions to be prepared in accordance with this rule.

Ramsay v. Glass, 9 Gill, 56. Anderson v. Garrett, 9 Gill, 121. Burtles v.
State, 4 Md. 278. Reynolds v. Negro Juliet, 14 Md. 118. Clements v. Mayor
& C. C. of Balto., 16 Md. 208. McTavish v. Carroll, 17 Md. 22. Hallowell v.
Miller, 17 Md. 305. McCann v. B & O. R. R., 20 Md. 202. Hartle v. Stahl, 27
Md. 174. C. C. & I. Co. v. McKaig, 27 Md. 267. Boyd v. Cross, 35 Md. 200.
Davis v. State, 38 Md 51. Blair v. Blair, 39 Md. 556. Scarlett v. Academy of
Masic, 43 Md. 203. Blake v. Pitcher, 46 Md. 462. Wilson v. Merryman, 48
Md. 341. B. & O. R. R, Co v Mali, 66 Md. 57.