tained.503 The courts require in respect to all these essentials a full though not strict compliance with the law 504 though not as to all, especially that relative to the injury where a technical descrip of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20, 78 N. W. 868; Horne v. Town of Rochester, 62 N. H. 347; Currier v. City of Concord, 68 N. H. 294, 44 Atl. 386; City of Lincoln v. O'Brien, 56 Neb. 761, 77 N. W. 76; Masters v. City of Troy, 50 Hun, 485, 3 N. Y. Supp. 450; Paddock v. City of Syracuse, 61 Hun, 8, 15 N. Y. Supp. 387; Cross v. City of Elmira, 86 Hun, 467, 33 N. Y. Supp. 947; Maloney v. Cook, 21 R. I. 471, 44 Atl. 692; Law v. Town of Fairfield, 46 Vt. 425; Babcock v. Town of Guilford, 47 Vt. 519; Bean v. Town of Concord, 48 Vt. 30; Ranney v. Town of Sheffield, 49 Vt. 191; Melendy v. Town of Bradford, 56 Vt. 148; Harris v. Town of Townsend, 56 Vt. 716; Salladay v. Town of Dodgeville, 85 Wis. 318, 55 N. W. 696, 20 L. R. A. 541; Barrett v. Village of Hammond, 87 Wis. 654, 58 N. W. 1053; Benson v. City of Madison, 101 Wis. 312, 77 N. W. 161; Van Loan v. Village of Lake Mills, 88 Wis. 430, 60 N. W. 710; Dolan v. City of Milwaukee, 89 Wis. 497, 61 N. W. 564. 503 City of Denver v. Barron, 6 Colo. App. 72, 39 Pac. 989; Tiesler v. Town of Norwich, 73 Conn. 199, 47 Atl. 161; Hoyt v. City of Danbury, 69 Conn. 341, 37 Atl. 1051; Wadleigh v. Inhabitants of Mt. Vernon, 75 Me. 79; Low v. Inhabitants of Windham, 75 Me. 113; Goodwin v. City of Gardiner, 84 Me. 278, 24 Atl. 846. Notice that one received "severe bodily injuries" not sufficient. Liffin v. Beverly, 145 Mass. 549, 14 N. E. 787; Driscoll v. City of Fall River, 163 Mass. 105, 39 N. E. 1003; Miller v. City of Springfield, 177 Mass. 373, 58 N. E. 1013; Noonan v. City of Lawrence, 130 Mass. 161; Bailey v. Inhabitants of Everett, 132 Mass. 441; Spooner v. Inhabitants of Freetown, 139 Mass. 235, 29 N. E. 662; Roberts v. Douglas, 140 Mass. 129; Brown v. City of Owosso, 126 Mich. 91, 85 N. W. 256; Stedman v. City of Rome, 88 Hun, 279, 34 N. Y. Supp. 737; Cook v. Town of Barton, 66 Vt. 65, 28 Atl. 631; Bartlett v. Town of Cabot, 54 Vt. 242. A notice is insufficient describing the injuries sustained as follows "Greatly injured her head, neck, back, ribs and limbs." Fassett v. Town of Roxbury, 55 Vt. 552; Laue v. City of Madison, 86 Wis. 453, 57 N. W. 93; Hein v. Village of Fairchild, 87 Wis. 258. 504 Manning v. Town of Woodstock, 59 Conn. 224, 22 Atl. 42; Carberry v. Inhabitants of Sharon, 166 Mass. 32, 43 N. E. 912; Higgins v. Inhabitants of North Andover, 168 Mass. 251, 47 N. E. 85; Kenady v. City of Lawrence, 128 Mass. 318; Wilkins v. City of Flint, 128 Mich. 262, 87 N. W. 195; Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446, 42 N. W. 350; Carr v. Town of Ashland, 62 N. H. 665; City of Lincoln v. Pirner, 59 Neb. 634, 81 N. W. 846; Wall v. Town of Highland, 72 Wis. 435, 39 N. W. 560; Fopper v. Town of Wheatland, 59 Wis. 623; Laird v. Town of Otsego, 90 Wis. 25, 62 N. W. 1042; Collins v. City of Janesville, 107 Wis. 436, 83 N. W. 695; Althouse v. Town of Jamestown, 91 Wis. 46, 64 N. W. 423. But see Gardner v. Inhabitants of Weymouth, 155 Mass. 595, 30 N. E. 363. tion is not necessary.505 The question is usually one for the jury.508 This involves ordinarily, a consideration of the time and manner of service. That a public corporation may be informed and the law; therefore, complied with, it is necessary that the notice. be served within the time fixed 507 and upon that officer or agent of the corporation designated as one who, because of his official capacity, is regarded as representing the corporation for this purpose.508 The rule of strict construction stated above applies and a failure to serve within the time prescribed or upon the officer or in the manner designated will be sufficient to bar a recovery. 505 Brown v. Town of Southbury, 53 Conn. 212. 506 Chapman V. Inhabitants of Nobleboro, 76 Me. 427. See, also, cases cited under second preceding note. 507 Gardner v. City of New Loudon, 63 Conn. 267, 28 Atl. 42; Kennedy v. City of Des Moines, 84 Iowa, 187, 50 N. W. 880. Legislation of this character cannot be retroactive. Marcotte V. City of Lewiston, 94 Me. 233, 47 Atl. 137; Nash v. Inhabitants of South Hadley, 145 Mass. 105, 13 N. E. 376; Lyons v. City of Cambridge, 132 Mass. 534; Ray v. City of St. Paul, 44 Minn. 340, 46 N. W. 675; Welsh v. City of Franklin, 70 N. H. 491, 48 Atl. 1102; City of Omaha v. Ayer, 32 Neb. 375, 49 N. W. 445; City of Lincoln v. O'Brien, 56 Neb. 761, 77 N. W. 76; Curry v. City of Buffalo, 57 Hun, 25, 10 N. Y. Supp. 392, affirmed 135 N. Y. 366, 32 N. E. 80; Werner v. City of Rochester, 77 Hun, 33, 28 N. Y. Supp. 226; Sproul v. City of Seattle, 17 Wash. 256, 49 Pac. 489; Berry v. Town of Wauwatosa, 87 Wis. 401, 58 N. W. 751. 509 See, also, McKeigue v. City of Janesville, 68 Wis. 50, 31 N. W. 298. 508 City of Denver v. Saulcey, 5 Colo. App. 420, 38 Pac. 1098; Taylor v. Inhabitants of Woburn, 130 Mass. 494; McCabe v. City of Cambridge, 134 Mass. 484; Johnson v. City of St. Paul, 52 Minn. 364, 54 N. W. 735; Lyons v. City of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20, 78 N. W. 868; Kelly v. City of Minneapolis, 77 Minn. 76, 79 N. W. 653; Curry v. City of Buffalo, 57 Hun, 25, 10 N. Y. Supp. 392, affirmed 135 N. Y. 366, 32 N. E. 80; McDonald v. City of Troy, 59 Hun, 618, 13 N. Y. Supp. 385; Soper v. Town of Greenwich, 48 App. Div. 354, 62 N. Y. Supp. 1111. Mailing copy to town clerk sufficient. Seamons v. Fitts, 21 R. I. 236, 42 Atl. 863; Tyler v. Williston, 62 Vt. 269, 20 Atl. 304, 9 L. R. A. 338; Small v. Town of Prentice, 102 Wis. 256, 78 N. W. 415. Notice when mailed and received is sufficiently served. 509 Gardner v. City of New London, 63 Conn. 267; Crocker v. City of Hartford, 66 Conn. 387, 34 Atl. 98; Smiley v. Inhabitants of Mer § 1064. Pleadings; instructions to jury. The usual rules of practice obtain in respect to the pleadings; the questions of the sufficiency of the allegations,510 variance,511 rill Plantation, 84 Me. 322, 24 Atl. 872. The notice may be served upon the proper officials wherever they are found. Miles v. City of Lynn, 130 Mass. 398; Leonard v. City of Holyoke, 138 Mass. 78; Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157, 76 N. W. 1029; Olmstead v. Town of Pound Ridge, 71 Hun, 25, 24 N. Y. Supp. 615; Gregg v. Town of Weatherfield, 55 Vt. 385; Sowle v. City of Tomah, 81 Wis. 349, 51 N. W. 571. But see Harris v. Inhabitants of Newbury, 128 Mass. 321; Carpenter v. Town of Rolling, 107 Wis. 559, 83 N. W. 953. 510 Town of Cullman v. McMinn, 109 Ala. 614, 19 So. 981; City of Birmingham v. Starr, 112 Ala. 98, 20 So. 424; City of Denver v. Baldasari, 15 Colo. App. 157, 61 Pac. 199; City of Denver v. Hyatt, 28 Colo. 129, 63 Pac. 403; Town of Griswold v. Gallup, 22 Conn. 208; Dean v. Town of Sharon, 72 Conn. 667, 45 Atl. 963; City of Orlando v. Heard, 29 Fla. 581, 11 So. 182; Collier v. Hyatt, 110 Ga. 317, 35 S. E. 271; Slowey v. Village of Grand Ridge, 95 Ill. App. 39; Town of Williamsport v. Smith, 2 Ind. App. 360, 28 N. E. 156; Clark County Com'rs v. Brod, 3 Ind. App. 585, 29 N. E. 430; Town of Nappanee v. Ruckman, 7 Ind. App. 361, 34 N. E. 609; City of Bloomington v. Rogers, 9 Ind. App. 230, 36 N. E. 439; Jackson County Com'rs v. Nichols, 139 Ind. 611, 38 N. E. 526; City of Huntingburgh v. First, 15 Ind. App. 552, 43 N. E. 17; Town of Odon v. Dobbs, 25 Ind. App. 522, 58 N. E. 562; City of Goshen v. Alford, 154 Ind. 58, 55 N. E. 27; Lewis v. City of Eskridge, 52 Kan. 282, 34 Pac. 892; City of Lawrence v. Littell, 9 Kan. App. 130, 58 Pac. 495; Guest v. Church Hill Com'rs, 90 Md. 689, 45 Atl. 882; Read v. Inhabitants of Chelmsford, 33 Mass. (16 Pick.) 128; McKormick v. West Bay City, 110 Mich. 265, 68 N. W. 148; Snyder v. City of Albion, 113 Mich. 275, 71 N. W. 475; Alexander v. City of Big Rapids, 76 Mich. 282, 42 N. W. 1071; Mitchell v. City of Plattsburg, 33 Mo. App. 555; Arnold v. City of St. Louis, 152 Mo. 173, 53 S. W. 900, 48 L. R. A. 291; Stainback v. City of Meridian, 79 Miss. 447, 28 So. 947, 30 So. 607; Snook v. City of Anaconda, 26 Mont. 128, 66 Pac. 756; Corey v. Bath, 35 N. H. 530; Stone v. Pendleton, 21 R. I. 332, 43 Atl. 643; City of Honey Grove v. Lamaster (Tex. Civ. App.) 50 S. W. 1053; Crockett v. Village of Barre, 66 Vt. 269, 29 Atl. 147. Sufficiency of allegations in respect to corporate existence considered. Whitty v. City of Oshkosh, 106 Wis. 87, 81 N. W. 992; Byington v. City of Merrill, 112 Wis. 211, 88 N. W. 26; Koepke v. City of Milwaukee, 112 Wis. 475, 88 N. W. 238. 511 City of Birmingham v. Tayloe, 105 Ala. 170, 16 So. 576; Davis v. Town of Guilford, 55 Conn. 351, 11 Atl. 350; Ashborne v. Town of Waterbury, 70 Conn. 551, 40 Atl. 458; City of Rock Island v. Cuinely, 26 Ill. App. 173; City of Springfield v. Purdey, 61 Ill. App. 114; City of Joliet v. Johnson, 177 Ill. 178, 52 N. E. 498; Campbell v. City of Kalamazoo, 80 Mich. 655, 45 N. W. amendments 512 and parties,513 being determined by the procedure obtaining in a particular jurisdiction. § 1065. Proper evidence. The admissibility of evidence is a matter of law to be determined under the rules regulating the subject. The condition of the highway at the place of the defect or in close proximity 514 at the time of the accident and subsequent 515 or prior to it are the questions most frequently presented, and the manner of proving these conditions.516 No general rule can be given which will assist 652; Smith v. Walker Tp., 117 Mich. 14, 75 N. W. 141; Van Cleave v. City of St. Louis, 159 Mo. 574, 60 S. W. 1091; Plummer v. City of Milan, 70 Mo. App. 598. 512 Grattan v. Village of Williamston, 116 Mich. 462, 74 N. W. 668. 513 Severin v. Eddy, 52 Ill. 189; Mancuso v. Kansas City, 74 Mo. App. 138; Rhobidas v. City of Coucord, 70 N. H. 90, 47 Atl. 82, 51 L. R. A. 381. 514 Driscoll v. City of Ansonia, 73 Conn. 743, 47 Atl. 718; City of Kankakee v. Steinbach, 89 Ill. App. 513; Ledgerwood v. Webster City, 93 Iowa, 726, 61 N. W. 1089; Bailey v. City of Centerville, 108 Iowa, 20, 78 N. W. 831; Kansas City v. McDonald, 60 Kan. 481, 57 Pac. 123, 45 L. R. A. 429; Rodda v. City of Detroit, 117 Mich. 412, 75 N. W. 939; Brown v. City of Owosso, 130 Mich. 107, 89 N. W. 568; Poole v. City of Jackson, 93 Tenn. 62, 23 S. W. 57; Grundy v. City of Janesville, 84 Wis. 574. 54 N. W. 1085; Spearbracker v. Town of Larrabee, 64 Wis. 573; Conrad v. Town of Ellington, 104 Wis. 367, 80 N. W. 456. See, also, § 1039, ante. 515 District of Columbia v. Woodbury, 136 U. S. 450; City of Bloomington v. Osterle, 139 Ill. 120, 28 N. E. 1068; Munger v. City of Water loo, 83 Iowa, 559, 49 N. W. 1028; Hoyt v. City of Des Moines, 76 Iowa, 430, 41 N. W. 63. Evidence of the condition of the walk after the accident is inadmissible in the absence of testimony that its condition was unchanged since the accident. Parker v. City of Ottumwa, 113 Iowa, 649, 85 N. W. 805; City of Abilene v. Hendricks, 36 Kan. 196, 13 Pac. 121; City of Ottawa v. Black, 10 Kan. App. 439, 61 Pac. 985; Haynes v. City of Hillsdale, 113 Mich. 44, 71 N. W. 466; Fuller v. City of Jackson, 92 Mich. 197, 52 N. W. 1075; Johnson v. City of St. Paul, 52 Minn. 364, 54 N. W. 735; Hall v. City of Austin, 73 Minn. 134, 75 N. W. 112; Plummer v. City of Milan, 79 Mo. App. 439; Kuntsch v. City of New Haven, 83 Mo. App. 174; City of Belton v. Turner (Tex. Civ. App.) 27 S. W. 831; City of Dallas v. Jones (Tex. Civ. App.) 54 S. W. 606; Cook v. Town of Barton, 66 Vt. 65, 28 Atl. 631; Brown v. Town of Swanton, 69 Vt. 53, 37 Atl. 280; Salladay v. Town of Dodgeville, 85 Wis. 318, 55 N. W. 696, 20 L. R. A. 541; Selleck v. City of Janesville, 104 Wis. 570, 80 N. W. 944, 47 L. R. A. 691. See, also, § 1039, ante. 516 City of Denver v. Hyatt, 28 Colo. 129, 63 Pac. 403; Smith v. the practitioner. In the notes will be found many cases with an indication of the particular question involved in each one.517 Sufficiency of evidence. The question of the sufficiency of evidence is one ordinarily for the jury to determine and necessarily varies with each particular case.518 City of Gilman, 38 Ill. App. 393; Bibbins v. City of Chicago, 193 Ill. 359, 61 N. E. 1030, reversing 94 Ill. App. 319; Nesbit v. Town of Garner, 75 Iowa, 314, 39 N. W. 516, 1 L. R. A. 152; McConnell v. City of Osage, 80 Iowa, 293, 45 N. W. 550, 8 L. R. A. 778; Ford v. City of Des Moines, 106 Iowa, 94, 75 N. W. 630; Hartford County Com'rs v. Wise, 71 Md. 43, 18 Atl. 31; Daniels v. City of Lowell, 139 Mass. 56, 29 N. E. 222; Neal v. City of Boston, 160 Mass. 518, 36 N. E. 308; Upham v. City of Salem, 162 Mass. 483, 39 N. E. 178; Shippy v. Village of Au Sable, 85 Mich. 280, 48 N. W. 584; Thompson v. Village of Quincy, 83 Mich. 173, 47 N. W. 114, 10 L. R. A. 734; Davis v. City of Manchester, 62 N. H. 422; Terwilliger v. Town of Crawford, 40 App. Div. 253, 59 N. Y. Supp. 64; Pearson v. Spartenburg County, 51 S. C. 480, 29 S. E. 193; City of Corsicana v. Tobin, 23 Tex. Civ. App. 492, 57 S. W. 319; Shelley v. City of Austin, 74 Tex. 608, 12 S. W. 753; Piper v. City of Spokane, 22 Wash. 147, 60 Pac. 138; Shafer v. City of Eau Claire, 105 Wis. 239, 81 N. W. 409; Collins v. City of Janesville, 111 Wis. 348, 87 N. W. 241, 1087. 517 City of Lincoln v. Power, 151 U. S. 436. Provisions of municipal code relative to the duty of the city and its officers in respect to the care of its streets are admissible as evidence. City of Salem v. Webster, 192 Ill. 369, 61 N. E. 323, affirming 95 Ill. App. 120; Village of Cullom v. Justice, 161 Ill. 372, 43 N. E. 1098; City of Newport v. Miller, 93 Ky. 22, 18 S. W. 835; Dennett v. Inhabitants of Wellington, 15 Me. 27; Carle v. City of Desoto, 156 Mo. 443, 57 S. W. 113; Snook v. City of Anaconda, 26 Mont. 128, 66 Pac. 756; Card v. Columbia Tp., 191 Pa. 254, 43 Atl. 217; Stone v. Pendleton, 21 R. I. 332, 43 Atl. 643; Pearson v. Spartanburg County, 51 S. C. 480, 29 S. E. 193; Nellums v. City of Nashville, 106 Tenn. 222, 61 S. W. 88. A city may show under a plea of not guilty that it never accepted that portion of the street where the accident occurred. Stricker v. Town of Reedsburg, 101 Wis. 457, 77 N. W. 897. 518 District of Columbia v. Payne, 13 App. D. C. 500; Central City Ice Works v. City of Macon, 92 Ga. 413, 17 S. E. 660; Williams v. City of Carterville, 97 Ill. App. 160; Sullivan County Com'rs v. Sisson, 2 Ind. App. 311, 28 N. E. 374; City of Ft. Wayne v. Durnell, 13 Ind. App. 669, 42 N. E. 242; City of Indianapolis v. Mitchell, 27 Ind. App. 589, 61 N. E. 947; Libbey v. Inhabitants of Greenbush, 20 Me. 47; Fuller v. Inhabitants of Hyde Park, 162 Mass. 51, 37 N. E. 782. Question for jury. Shipley v. Proctor, 177 Mass. 498, 59 N. E. 119; Murphy v. City of Worcester, 159 Mass. 546, 34 N. E. 1080; Baustian v. Young, 152 Mo. 317, 53 S. W. 921; Village of Edgar v. Mills, 32 Neb. 718, 49 N. W. 710; City of Grand Island v. Oberschulte, 36 Neb. 696, |