unhealthful condition existed therein, when by the exercise of ordinary care plaintiff could have prevented this condition; that by reason of the dampness of said'basement and the clouds of steam given forth from the furnace, as above outlined, rising up into defendant’s apartment, his two infant child were caused to contract colds and become sick, by reason of which defendant was compelled to spend $50 -in doctor’s bills; that this condition'was known to -the plaintiff or could have' been known by the exercise of ordinary care: The counterclaim further alleges the contract for the letting of the apartment, between himself and plaintiff, included ■ a garage; that the roof of the said garage was and is the floor of the first floor porch, over which porch the plaintiff retained control, and which he reserved for the common use of his tenants; that the plaintiff negligently permitted the floor of the pbrch to fall into such a state of disrepair as to permit rain and other water to run through the floor of said pOrch upon and onto defendant’s automobile, ruining the finish thereof and damaging defendant in the amount of $38. The counterclaim further states that as a result of these conditions the apartment' was made untenable and that he was compelled to abandon the occupancy thereof and was compelled to expend the sum of $12 in moving to another residence. The counterclaim concludes with a prayer for a judgment against plaintiff in the sum of $100 and costs. = ■■