The Circuit Court

May 28. The appeal of Mary C. Emeraon, et al, from the dectsiou of the Probate Court, before the Circuit C'ourt ns we went to press last weck, Judge Pealer, of Tli reo Rivera, prnsldlng, the verdict by order of the Coort was for the will; until tirst day of next term giveu to prepare, I serve and notice for settlement bill of exceptions. May 20. In the case of Aullman, Mlller & Co. vs. George üerrlck-, it was cided thnt the plaintiff could not recover, and judjrinent was rendered for the costs. In appeal of Ilebron E. Cnmburn vs. Darwin C. Griffen, plaiutiff was j suited, aud judgment rendered for j fendant for $98, and costs. The case of Benjamin P, Crane vs. j James M. Aslilej', aesumpsit, was ued. Deeree of divorce was granted in the cause of Mary Riggs vs. Chauncty i Riggs. June 4. In the case of Eva C. Davlson ví. Edfar A. Davlaon, n deeree was granted. DEXTI2IÍ DEAIff. 'J'lie case of Mm y Lyman, et al, VB. Thomas Mui-ry and Edward A. Nordrnan, bill to raatrain collection ot' ditch tax, cmiie tij) yesterüay, and proofs and argumenta were friven, Sawyer & Knowlton for plainlifls.aiid E. G. Einbler fordefendants. As the decisions of the Court Ihis ruorniug are of general interest, we frive tlic case detalled notice. In 1803, the three couuty drain commis siouers, ander a law of 18G1, In applylng to the Probate Court for a special co.mnission for the construction of a drain In Dexter township, failed to give notice of the same to the persons owning land through wliich the drain was to be cut. In due course of' time a drain was laid out and completed UUdei' the name ot " Dexter Drain, Xo. 1." In 18S3, the county drain commigBloner attempted to clean out and wideu tbe dltcb, acting ander the law of 1881. The cost of the same was spread upon the tax roll of the town of Dexter, and partles loterested In the dralu (led a bilí to sel asidc the tax and enjoiu its collection. In giviug liis declsioD this mornlng, Judge Joslyn, siwtfilning the plalntifb, held, First: That the commissioner of 180-3 ilid not obtaiu jurisdiclion becanse of their faihire to serve notice of tbell appHcation to the Probate Coiirt, as stated heretofoie, upon the owners of the land throngh whlch the dltch was cut. Second : That the c-ommissioneis in establishing t!ie draii) fuiled to state in their Bpecilieations of the s.iine the widtb and tlepth of cut apon ench mau's land over which the dltch passod. The decisión is of special interest to the varloua ilralu commissioners and otilen.