Decision In The Burke Vs. Webb Case

Wm. Burke vs. Myron Webb ; error to ashtenaw. Opinión by Marstou, J. : Webb was sheriff of Washtenaw county and is such had in his hands an executiou against I'homas O'Brien, to satisfy which he levied apon all the wheat growiug upon to the farm Df the latter in the township of Webster. A.fter the wheat was harvested U'Brien, in arder to prevent the sheriff from taking posiession of it and selling ït to satisfy his writ, procured Burke to execute and deliver to the heriff a contract or receipt, in which he agrees 10 dehver the wheat when called for or to pay ;he sheriff the amouut of the execution, with iamages, costs and trouule. The court below tound for the sheriff balance due, costs, etc, S223 14, and for his time and trouble $30, and oosts to be taxed. The principal quesüon in the case is whether the finding of facts by the court below warranted it in renderiug this udgment. Held, That the finding is defectivo. It nowhere states or iutimates in any way the value of this wheat. The amouut of the j udgment is in uo way tixed or determined by the value Dl the wheat, but solely by the amount due upon the j udgment in the original cause, and the amount added tbereto accordiug to the terms of the receipt. Such a measure of damages might far exceed the value of the property receipted for. The court below undoubtedly believed that the legal effect of Burke's receipt was accordiug to its terms, to bring him either to deliver the whent or pay the amount due. But this was not an action brought upon the contract ; it was au actiou of trover for au unlawíul conversión of the wheat. Held, also, That the court erred in allowing the sheriff for his time and trouble about the suit f 30. The law fixes the Bheriff's compensation for collectmg on executions, and he could not inake a valid agreement with the execution debtor or with the receiptor for any additional compeusatiou. It is coutrary to the policy of the law to permit such agreements. Judgment reversed and new trial granted. The following notice served upon us is elaburate enough to f ully explain itself : State of Michigan, City of Ann Arbor, ss. To Hale & Tremain, Dr. W. H. Jacksou, Densmore Cramer, Carr & Goulet, editors ana publishers of the Michigan Argus, occupants of the building knowu as the Botsford block, on the corner of Main aud Hurou streets, in tlie city of Ann Arbor : Whereas, the Common Council of said city ot Ann Arbor, on the report of the Street Committee, made on the 7th day of June, A D. 1875, upon the written recommendation of Aldennan A. D. Besimer, submitted to said Common Connoil, and referred to said Committee on the 17th day of May, 187, in the words following, to wit : " To the Commou Council of the city of Aun Arbor : The underslgned hereby calis the attention of thia Council to the tact that West Huron Street, oue of the most public streets in the city of Ann Arbor, is uulawfully encroached upon and obstructed by the maintenance thereon of a Üight of stairs, throe feet wide, on the south side thereot adjoining a building owned by Smith Botsford, and occupied by Hale & Tremain, on the southwest corner of Main and Hurou steets, to the great aunoyance of the public, and respectfully recommend the immediate adoptiou by this Council of means for the removal of such obstruction. Dated Ann Arbor, May 17th, 1875'." Signed A. D. Besimer,- did on the 7th day of June, 1875, resolve as lollows, to wit : On motion of Alderman Besimer, " Resolved, That the City Marshal be directed under the advice of the City Attorney, to notify the owners or occupants ot the stairway on West Huron street, adjoining the etore of Messrs Hale & Tremain to remove the same within thirty days. Now, therefore, you are hereby notitied, in pursuaiice of said resolution to remove said stairway within thirty days from the service upou you of this notice. Ann Arbor, June 16th, 1875. Edw. Stiliso, Marshal. The follow letter which appeared in the Detroit Free Press relates to a subject which has been much talked of in Aun Aruor during the past few days : Ann Aeboe, June 14. To the Editor of the Detroit Free Press: In your issue of yesterday reference is made by your Aun Arbor correspondent to the charge of plagiansm brought against Prof. C. K. Adams by a writter iu the last number of the Nation. Prof. Adams is himself just starting upon his trip to Cornell University, where he is to bear a prominent part in the commencement exercises ; and in this emergency I take it upon myself to inform your readers that he has already sent to the Nation a letter in full reply to the accBsation juat raentioned. I have myself seeu the letter in manuscript, and in my opinión it is a clear and perfect refutation of every item and atom of the charge which has been raised agaiust hini. The letter itself will be in print probably in the next number of the jourual above referred to, and will, I am conh'dent, satisfy every candid and intelligent reader of it that there is not the siightest grouud for suspecting the literary iutegrity of a gentleman whose recent honor iu letters have been as gratifying to his assouiates here as his present eminent success as a teacher is profitable to the studeuts and to the University. Surely it is not too much to aak that no man should condemn Prof. Adams bul'ore hearing him. Truly youra,