for the trust property, especially where all parties reside in that state, and the creditors have not appealed to this court for any such purpose.-Ibid.

RECORDING LAWS.

See HOMESTEAD, 11.

RIVERS.

1. Meaning of word as used in the Crimes Acts of Congress. — People v. Tyler, 161.

SALE.

See ST. MARY'S FALLS SHIP CANAL Co., 2.

SELECTION.

See HOMESTEAD.

SHERIFF.

See ATTACHMENT BOND, 1.

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.

1. Where the owner of land permitted a person to occupy and improve the same for a number of years, under a verbal contract of purchase, and under the impression that he might pay for it when demanded, and the purchaser offered to pay when notified to do so, -Held, that there was no such laches imputable to the purchaser as should debar him from the specific performance of the contract. Ingersoll v. Horton, 405.

2. A notice served by the owner, in such a case, requiring the purchaser to pay for the land in a specified time, and take a deed therefor, estops him from taking advantage of laches of the purchaser prior to such notice. Ibid.

SPIRITUOUS LIQUORS.

See PRO HIBITORY LIQUOR LAW.

STARE DECISIS.

1. Where an erroneous principle has been established by the judicial decisions of the state, and individuals acting upon it as settled law have acquired rights under it, this court, after the lapse of many years, will hesitate long before overruling it, believing it to be better and safer to leave it to the Legislature to correct the error, as in that case all intervening rights would be saved, and injustice done to no one.-Emerson. v. Atwater, 12.

STATE SWAMP LANDS.

1. The ninth section of the Act for the sale of the State Swamp Lands, (Laws of 1858, p. 173) made provisions for two distinct classes of purchasers; namely, settlers and occupants of such lands at the time of the passage of such act, who should have been such December 1st, 1857, and owners and occupants of adjoining lands, who were such December 1st, 1857.-People v. State Treasurer, 366.

2. Occupancy of the adjoining lands, under this act, might consist of cultivation and use, without actual residence, or might be by a tenant; and the Commissioner of the State Land office had no right to require actual residence.-Ibid.

3. Though this act made void any certificate of purchase under it, issued through mistake, fraud, &c., it did not confer upon the Commissioner of the Land office power to adjudge void and cancel such certificate, and he could not re-sell the land unless the certificate was voluntarily returned, or adjudged void by the proper court. — Ibid.

STATUTES, CONSTRUCTION OF

See CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTES.

STATUTES CONSTRUED OR COMMENTED ON.

Admiralty Jurisdiction of United States Courts. The Crimes

Act of Congress, of March 3d, 1857,

Attachment Bond. Assignment of.

161.

Comp. L. § 4757

ments. Comp. L. p. 1275

of Lands. Comp. L. p. 1322

Jurisdiction of summary proceedings to recover possession

Costs in Error. Comp. L. §5612

Executors and Administrators. Rights of to possession of real

estate of deceased. Comp. L. §2904

Fraudulent Conveyances. Comp. L. §3201
Fraudulent Debtors Act. Comp. L. Chap. 166

352

341

78

341

108, 145, 334

472

Justices' Courts. Suit in against Corporations.

Criminal Jurisdiction of

Entry of judgment on verdict.

Police Court of Detroit. Appeal from, S. L. 1850, p. 364
Prohibitory Liquor Law.

Railroad Companies. Service of process on. Comp. L. $4846

291

467

315

456

145, 374

Canal.

St. Mary's Falls Ship Canal. Act of Feb. 12th, 1853

Trespass to Lands. Comp. L. Chap. 137

Witnesses, Commitment of for refusal to testify. Comp. L. §4295

STATUTES, REPEAL OF.

See HOMESTEAD, 1.

84

423

452

ST. CLAIR RIVER.

See ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION.

ST. MARY'S FALLS SHIP CANAL CO.

1. The act of the Legislature of Michigan of February 12th, 1853, authorizing the commissioners for the construction of the St. Mary's Falls Ship Canal to stipulate on behalf of the state, in the contract for such construction, that any taxes to be assessed on the lands donated for that purpose should be remitted to the contractors for a period of five years, except as to any portion of such lands sooner sold; and the contracts made by the commissioners in pursuance of such act, are constitutional and valid.--People v. Auditor General, 84.

2. Whether the contractors, by making an agreement of sale for a parcel of the lands, receiving a payment down, and giving

the usual contract in such cases for a conveyance on the re mainder being paid, thereby sell such parcel within the meaning of said act-quere.—Ibid.

STREET.

See DEDICATION; WAYS.

SWAMP LANDS.

See STATE SWAMP LANDS.

TIME, COMPUTATION OF.

See PRACTICE IN SUPREME COURT, 13.

TRESPASS TO LANDS.

1. Where action was brought in justice's court under the statute giving treble damages for trespass on lands, and cutting and carrying away timber, &c., and the declaration referred to the chapter of the statute by the wrong number, but otherwise cited it correctly, and it was not demurred to,-- Held, sufficicient to support a verdict for plaintiff.-Achey v. Hull, 423. 2. The said statute was not framed to protect mere possessory rights, but to give the owner of the fee the right to sue, under the form of trespass, for injuries to his inheritance. And it is therefore not a defense to the action that defendant had disseized the plaintiff, though it may prevent treble damages. — Ibid.

8. Where the proof given in such action, without objection, only shows plaintiff to own one undivided half of the premises, but no plea in abatement has been interposed, the non-joinder of the other owner as plaintiff only goes to apportion the damages. And in error, where it is not claimed or objected that entire damages were assessed, the court will not presume that they were not apportioned. — Ibid.

4. When such action is brought for cutting down timber, the plaintiff is entitled to recover as damages the amount by which the value of the estate is diminished by its destruction, and not merely the value of the trees. — Ibid.

5. Where an objection was taken on the trial to the recovery of certain damages, on the ground solely that they were not al

lowed by the statute, and the objection correctly overruled, the court on error will not reverse the judgment on the ground that the declaration was too general to include such damages. — Ibid.

WAREHOUSEMEN.

See RAILROAD CORPORATION, 6, 7.

WAY.

1. To make the obstruction of a way an indictable offense, it must injuriously affect some right in which the public in their aggregate capacity have a common interest, as distinguished from a mere individual or private right. If it affect only the rights of an individual, or of a definite number of persons, less than the whole, in their individual capacity, no indictment lies. -People v. Jackson, 432.

2. To constitute a highway, the way must be one over which all the people of the state have a common and an equal right to travel; or, at least, a general interest to keep unobstructed. Ibid.

3. When the obstruction of a way can prejudice only the rights of the owners or occupants of adjoining lots, they have their reme. dy by private action; if it affect only the rights of the inhabitants of the city, or the rights of the city in its corporate capacity, it may be a proper subject for the local police of the city, to be regulated by ordinances and by laws; but in neither case would it be the proper subject of an indictment. — Ibid.

4. An alley or cul de sac, fifty feet in length, in the interior of a city block, opening into other alleys which extend to public streets, but having itself no communication with streets except through those alleys; not being capable of forming a passage way from one street to another, but furnishing access only to the rear of lots in the block; and never opened, worked, or used as a highway; and not shown to have dwellings upon, or adjoining it, to which it gives access, is not a way for the obstruction of which an indictment will lie.—Ibid.

See DEDICATION.

WITNESS.

1. Where one defendant answers, and the other interposes a plea