Simpson

(after stating the facts as above). The defendant in error moves to strike ont the bill of exceptions on the ground thát it fails to comply with rule 4 of the Supreme Court Rules, adopted December 22, 1911, which requires that only so much of the evidence shall be embraced in the bill of exceptions as may be necessary to present clearly the questions of law involved in tho rulings to which exceptions are reserved, and such evidence as is embraced therein shall be set forth in condensed and narrative form, save as a proper understanding of the questions presented may require that parts of it may he set forth otherwise. While bills of exceptions which unnecessarily set out the stenographer’s transcript of the testimony have been disapproved, Wheeling Terminal Ry. Co. v. Russell, 209 F. 795 , 126 C. C. A. 519 ; Rosen v. United States (C. C. A.) 271 F. 651 , the courts have declined to strike them out, First Nat. Bank v. Moore, 148 F. 953 , 78 C. C. A. 581 ; National Masonic Acc. Ass’n v. Shryock, 73 F. 774 , 20 C. C. A. 3 ; Chicago G. W. Ry. Co. v. Price, 97 F. 423 , 38 C. C. A. 239 .

There is especial ground for so ruling in a case such as the ease at bar, where the only point…