5. A woman brought suit against her husband's employer for an indecent assault. The employer had discharged the husband before the action was brought. Held proper for him to show the reason why, in order to exclude the pretense that it was induced by any change caused by defendant's alleged misbehavior. Id. 6. In an action for assault and battery the plaintiff averred that by reason of the battery he was greatly hindered and prevented from doing and performing his work and business and looking after and attending his necessary affairs and avocations. Held, that this allegation did not justify the reception of evidence that plaintiff, being a farmer, and having hay ungathered at the time of the injury, was troubled in getting help to save it, and in consequence was seriously injured. Heiser v. Loomis, 16.

7. It is not competent as an excuse for a battery to prove that several days before it was committed plaintiff had used insulting language to defendant's wife, or had threatened the defendant. Id.

8. The court in such a case having properly excluded evidence of previous threats by the plaintiff, permitted the plaintiff to prove the negative that at the time in question the plaintiff made no threats. Held to be error, and well calculated to prejudice the defence with the jury. Id.

assault with intent to rob, information for: CRIMINAL LAW, 15, 16, -332.

conviction of, on charge of rape: CRIMINAL Law, 14,—636. costs, when limited by damages: Costs. 1,—60.

cross-examination of defendant in action for indecent assault: WITNESS, 13; 14,-508.

ASSENT

of counties to stenographer's salary: STENOGRAPHER, 1,—146. ASSESSMENT

by foreign authority on members of CORPORATIONS, 3,-429. levy by mutual benefit association not compelled by MANDAMUS, 9, -646.

of business property: TAXATION, 1,-502.

roll, certificate to: TAXATION, 2,-283.

ASSETS

managing director's control of: CORPORATIONS, 10,–338.

of partnership: PARTNERSHIP, 2-5,-297.

withholding part of,.from assignees: DEBTOR, ETC., 3-6,-505. ASSIGNMENT

for benefit of creditors: DEBTOR, ETC., 1-6,-37, 505.

for creditors, trover by assignee: DEBTOR, ETC. 2,-37.

of error, in certiorari cases: PRACTICE, 6,-265.

of error, must be supported by an exception: PRACTICE, 13,-113.

of interest under deed of trust: EQUITY, 17,—267.

of mortgage, application of payments: MORTGAGE OF LAND, 28,— 545.

or property as an exoneration from liability: SURETYSHIP, 3,-352. setting off assigned claim: SET-OFF, 1,—352.

ASSISTANCE, WRIT OF.

1. Matter set up in defence to a motion for a writ of assistance cannot be received to affect the decree determining the defendant's rights. Howe v. Lemon, 544.

2. Where proceedings by writ of assistance were taken on the foot of a foreclosure decree against a wife, leave being given to discontinue as against the husband, the objection that the papers were wrongly entitled in the names of both defendants was held a mere technicality, especially where it was not clear from the record whether the order of discontinuance had been entered. Id.

ASSUMPSIT.

mortgagee cannot bring: MORTGAGE OF CHATTELS, 4,—435. recovery under executed parol agreement: STATUTE OF FRAUDS, 3,— 183.

ATTACHMENT

on assigned property: DEBTOR, ETC., 1, 2,—37. ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.

1. An attorney has a lien upon money collected by him for his professional services in collecting it; and in settling and paying over the proceeds he has a right to ask for a final settlement and insist upon a receipt for the moneys paid; and if there is no fraud, duress, oppression, undue advantage or mistake in the settlement, it is binding. Dowling v. Eggemann, 171.

administration of oaths by attorney: MORTGAGE OF LAND, 12,—550. attorney's fee in mortgage: MORTGAGE OF LAND, 9, 10,-251. counsel fee for hearing: Costs, 6,-643.

notice to, of taking testimony: WITNESS, 4-6,-82.

testimony of prosecuting attorney, when not privileged: EVIDENCE, 14,-352.

ATTORNMENT

to prevailing party in ejectment: LANDLORD AND TENANT, 2,—201.

BAIL.

1. The bail of an accused person are entitled to his custody, and may deliver him to the authorities at any time; the legal duress does not cease until the prisoner is discharged. Matter of Cannon, 481. 'BAILMENT

with vendor; SALE, 4, 5,-527.

BANKS AND BANKING

notice to manager of branch bank: BILLS AND NOTES, 8,-359. BAR.

award of mandamus cannot be pleaded in: MANDAMUS, 5,—424. BASTARDY.

1. Bastardy proceedings involve no indictable offense on which a conviction can be had in the course of the proceedings, and they are not strictly criminal. Matter of Cannon, 481.

BIDS

for public printing: CONTRACTS, 10-13,-135. bond of bidder for public printing: CONTRACTS, 13,-136. BILL IN EQUITY

for support of wife apart from husband: HUSBAND, ETC., for wrongful transfer of stock: CORPORATIONS, 8,-338. in aid of execution: DEBTOR, ETC., 12-15,-189.

to set aside deed: DEBTOR, ETC., 16,-647.

to set up an unrecorded deed: EQUITY, 5,-516.

to redeem, averments in: MORTGAGE OF LAND, 5, 6,-28.

to redeem, costs on: MORTGAGE OF LAND, 7,-28. order striking from files is final: APPEAL, 2,-177. striking from files: EQUITY, 18,-177.

BILL OF EXCEPTIONS.

what should show: PRACTICE, 10,–495.

BILL OF LADING.

indorsement of: CARRIERS, 8, 9,—495.

BILL OF PARTICULARS:

evidence under: PLEADING, 7-9,-501, 617.

averment of: PLEADING, 8,-501.

11,-151.

BILLS AND NOTES: Construction, 1, 2; guaranty of payment, 3, 4; accommodation acceptance, 5-11; bona fide purchase, 12; notice of protest, 13.

1. Suit by the heirs of the payee against the maker upon the following paper: "February 18, 1873. For money received I promise

"

to pay Alma A. Chamberlain four hundred and thirty-five dollars
out of my estate, if she should outlive me, but if not, to her heirs
as she shall direct, without use. [Signed] LYMAN CHAMBERLAIN.'
Held, that in no event was this note payable except after the death
of the maker and from his estate. Kelsey v. Chamberlain, 241.
2. Parol evidence cannot be received to vary the construction of
such an instrument. It must be its own interpreter. Id.

3. A note payable to order was indorsed by the payees with a guar-
anty of payment without protest. Such a guaranty is negotiable
by the statutes of this State. Comp. Laws § 1564. Green v. Bur-
rows, 70

4. A guaranty of payment indorsed on a note by one to whose order
it is payable is both a guaranty and an indorsement, and the note
will thereafter pass by mere delivery. And to a suit against the
maker the indorser may be joined as a defendant by the force of
the statute. Comp. Laws § 5776. Id.

5. An acceptor whose liability has not been changed by subsequent
dealings to his prejudice or against his rights, can be sued on his
acceptance, and is liable, in form, as acceptor, as every contract
must be sued according to its terms. Canadian Bank of Commerce
v. Coumbe, 358.

6. Campbell shipped lumber on vessels owned by Graham, who had
a partnership interest with him. Coumbe was Campbell's agent,
and was to receive half the profits of the lumber business. It was
arranged that Coumbe should settle freight bills with Graham by
accepting Graham's drafts on the Canadian Bank of Commerce,
and that the drafts were to be taken up by Campbell out of the
proceeds of sales. In an action by the bank against Coumbe upon
these acceptances it was held (1) that defendant's testimony that he
told Graham and Campbell that he would accept the drafts if they
would not hold him responsible, and that he was not himself a
partner and was neither expected nor bound to provide for freight,
would justify the jury in finding that the acceptances were accom-
modation acceptances; (2) that in order to prove the relations of
the parties and the consideration for the acceptances defendant
might properly show the details of the shipments, including bills
of lading and accounts of the several transactions; (3) that the
jury might consider plaintiff's course in discounting the drafts
before acceptance and in treating the maker as the primary debtor.
7. An accommodation acceptance stands upon its legal form if the
drawee has not had notice that it is only for accommodation; but
if he has had notice he cannot treat the maker as surety and the
acceptor as principal except for the purpose of choosing his form
of action on the acceptance. The acceptor must be treated like
any other surety so far as relates to prejudicing his rights. Id.
8. Where a bank is a corporation consisting of a number of branches,
and the resident manager of each branch, though keeping its
business distinct, is treated as an agent of the entire corporation,
and drafts on the bank are indorsed by one branch to another so
that the manager of the indorsee branch or his subordinates sees
to their presentation, an acceptor dealing with a manager may
fairly infer that he is the proper person to be notified of anything
affecting the acceptor's responsibility, if he has no notice or know-
ledge to the contrary. Id.

Id.

9. Notice to a bank on discounting paper, that it is accepted only for
accommodation, affects the bank in case, only, it makes arrange-
ments with some of the parties without consulting the others. Id.
10. An accommodation acceptor of paper may properly seek informa-
tion from the agent or manager of a bank to which the paper is to

47 MICH.--42

658

Bills and Notes.

INDEX.

Board of Supervisors.

be paid, as to the condition of the person whom both understand to be really responsible on it. And in a suit by the drawee against the acceptor, the latter may show his condition and the agent's statements or admissions. Id.

11. Where paper drawn upon a bank and accepted for accommodation has been taken up, it cannot be sued as belonging to the bank, or sued at all if known to be accepted for accommodation. Id. 12. Where one buys a past-due promissory note, and there is a dispute whether his vendor had any title or right to sell it, the motives of the purchaser in buying are important. Whether these are good or bad he can get no title unless the vendor had a right to sell. Church v. Clapp, 257.

13. The sufficiency of a notice of protest will not be considered if the fact of having received notice has not been denied on oath by any defendant. Comp. L. § 603. First Nat. Bk. of Negaunee v. Freeman, 408.

application on, of proceeds of mortgage sale: MORTGAGE OF LAND, 29,-100.

consideration for note: DURESS, 3,-489.

effect of concession in suit as to ownership: ESTOPPEL, 2,—257. indorsement by co-partners in running vessel: PARTNERSHIP, 6, 7,— 408.

liquor tax not payable in notes: LIQUOR TAX LAW, 1,—228. surrender of note before suing for FRAUD, 1,—194.

BOARD OF STATE AUDITORS

proposals for public printing: CONTRACTS, 10-13,-135.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Removal of officer, 1,2; rewards for conviction of offenders, 3-5; action on claims final, 6, 7.

1. Act 165 of 1877 permits a board of supervisors to remove an officer appointed by it on charges preferred to the board, or its chairman, and after notice of the hearing and a copy of the charges has been delivered to the officer, and full opportunity has been given him to be heard in his defence. Held, that as to time and notice of hearing the board does not act as an ordinary court but as a public board authorized to use their own time and methods, subject only to the condition that no one shall be removed without charges and reasonable notice, nor without a full opportunity to be heard; and a service on August 7th of a copy of charges and notice of meeting to be held August 18th to investigate them, was held sufficient though made on the authority of two supervisors without a meeting of the board. Gager v. Chippewa Supervisors,

167.

2. A board of supervisors need not meet for the mere purpose of ordering notice to be given of a hearing of charges against officers appointed by them. Id.

3. How far a board of supervisors has power to offer. rewards for arrest and conviction of offenders-Q. Stamp v. Cass County, 330. 4. A board of supervisors cannot, unless distinctly authorized by legislation, incur debts or make engagements except on the basis of benefit to the county it represents. Id.

5. Claims for services to a county under a reward offered therefor by the board of supervisors are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the board, and its disposition of them is not subject to review on the facts; nor will any action lie against the county therefor after the board has considered and rejected them. Id.

6. A sheriff, without first obtaining the authority of the supervisors for the purpose, employed a night watchman for the jail and boarded him at the jail while he was so employed. The board of supervisors paid the watchman, and the sheriff then presented a bill against the county for boarding him. This bill the board

Board of Supervisors.

INDEX.

Carriers.

659

refused to allow. Held, that the subject, under the Constitution of the State, was exclusively under the control of the board, and mandamus would not lie to compel the allowance. Peck v. Kent Supervisors, 477.

7. The sheriff also hired an office for himself, claiming that the one provided by the county was wholly insufficient and unsuitable, and also that his action was sanctioned by a committee of the board of supervisors. The board refused to allow his bill for the rent. Held, that the judiciary has no authority to supervise and control the action of the board in respect to such bill. * Id. affidavit of merits on certiorari to: CERTIORARI, 3,-168. BONA FIDE PURCHASER

motives in buying past-due note: BILLS AND NOTES, 12,-257. of certificates of stock: CORPORATIONS, 11, 12, 14, 17,-338, 339. BOND

injunction bond should be adequate: INJUNCTION, 2,-115. issue in excess of legal limit: SCHOOLS, ETC., 2,-226.

of bidder for public printing: CONTRACTS, 13,—136.

of city officer, acceptance and approval: MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS, 9,-586.

BOOM COMPANIES

effect of superintendent's taking an interest in CONTRACTS, 7,—309. BOUNTY.

laches in application for: -643. BURDEN OF PROOF

of showing mistake and over-payment: MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS, 8,-236.

on party attacking a prima facie right: EVIDENCE, 10,–339. BURGLARY

entry of store occupied as dwelling: CRIMINAL Law, 9, 10,–639.

•САРАСІТУ

mental capacity to make will: WILL, 1-3,-313.

CAPIAS AD RESPONDENDUM

case made lies for setting aside: PRACTICE, 11,—427.

not set aside on motion, for misnomer; PRACTICE, 7,—427. CARRIERS: Negligence of express company, 1; removal of passenger from train, 2-7; indorsement of bill of lading, 8, 9.

1. A concert singer contracted with certain persons to give a concert at a certain point, and the latter expressly stipulated that she should furnish them the posters announcing it, not later than the 21st inst. The posters were printed in another town, and were deliv ered to the express company on the evening of the 20th to be forwarded. The person in charge of the express office was told that the forwarders wanted the package to go on No. 5," in order to

make connection, as "they" wanted the package and did not want it to be delayed. Nothing was said about its contents or purpose or any necessity for its delivery next day, nor was any departure from the usual course of business asked for. The package was sent by train No. 5, but owing to the running arrangements it did not reach its destination until the evening of the 21st, and could not be delivered until the next day. The parties who had contracted for the concert accordingly cancelled the arrangement, and the concert singer, claiming to be injured in consequence, sued the express company for negligence in not making seasonable carriage and delivery of the package. Held, that the action could not lie. U. S. Express Co. v. Root, 231.

2. Railway passengers have a right to rely, until differently informed, on the information received by them from ticket agents in answer