"Where, in an action for a broker's services, plaintiff claimed that the defendant agreed to pay him $1,000,000 in case he purchased a railroad which plaintiff was endeavoring to sell, or became interested therein, and plaintiff claimed that thereafter defendant did become interested by participating in a syndicate by which such railroad. was consolidated with another, an instruction that plaintiff's contention was that defendant agreed to pay $1,000,000 if he went in with any one else in the purchase of the property, and that when he participated in the syndicate, "he did go in with somebody else, and therefore became indebted to him in the sum of $1,000,000," was erroneous, in eliminating the question whether there was any connection between the transaction with the defendant and the purchase of the road by the syndicate of which he afterwards became a member. Mingis v. Fitzgerald, 95 N. Y. S. 436, 108 App. Div. 24.