placed in his hands for collection,
unless the has paid the amount to
the officer to whom they were due.
Goldsmith's Adm'r. vs. Pattison's
Ex'r.
205

2. On a sale made by a sheriff under
a fieri facias, what things are con-
sidered fixtures to the freehold,
&c. Kirwan vs Latour,
290
3. Where a sheriff's return on a fieri
facias, and his conveyance of the
land sold under it, are apparently
regular, the title cannot be divested
out of the purchaser, except by
proof of fraud or collusion between
him and he sheriff Bull's Lessee
vs Sheredine,

410

4. An attachment may be had against
a sheriff for not returning a writ.
West vs Hughes,
453
5. If lands he sold by a sheriff under

a fieri facias issued on a prior
judgment and lien, the surplus of
the money arising from the sale
after satisfying such prior lien, re-
maining in the hands of the sheriff,
is to be considered as land, and
liable to an attachment issued on
a subsequent judgment and lien.
Davidson vs Clayland, Garnishee
of Blake,

See Fieri Facias 4, 8, 9.

Poundage Fees.

SLANDER.

546

1. The State stands in the place of the
Proprietary as to all lands belong-
ing to him at the time of the act of
confiscation Ringgold's Lesse vs.
Malott,
299 316
2. Where the State and an individual
have
e judgments against a deceased
person, in the payment of the debts
of the deceased by his executor,
the judgment of the state has a
preference, and is to be paid first.
Contee vs Chew's Er'r.
4'7

3. Under the act of March 1778, ch.
9, 6, as soon as a suit is commenc-
ed by the state, a lien is created on
the lands of the debtor, and the
state acquires a right of preter-
ence over the other creditors who
had not, prior to the commence-
ment of the suit by the state, se-
cured a lien by judgment, mortgage
or otherwise. Davidson vs. Clay-
land, Garnishee of Blake, 546

4.

If such lands be sold by the
sheriff under a fieri facias issued
on a prior judgment and lien, the
surplus of the money arising from
the sale, after satisfying such prior
lien, remaining in the hands of the
sheriff, is to be considered as land
and subject to an attachment issued
by the state on its judgment, in
preference to a prior attachment is-
sued by a private creditor on a judg

482

the fieri facias. Quere. The State
use of Warder, vs. Page, et al 475
2. If an appeal or writ of error be dis-
missed by the appellant or plaintiff
in error, a second appeal or writ of
error, though bond be filed, &c.
will not operate as a supersedeas,
where the first appeal, &c was a
supersedeas. Whetcroft's Adm'r. vs.
Dorsey's Ex'rs
3. A writ of error is not a supersedeas
where the bond is not given in
double the amount of the debt and
costs recovered, or where the con-
dition of such bond is that if the
plaintiff in error shall not prosecute
such writ of error with effect, the
bond shall not be void. Johnson vs.
Goldsborough,

SURETY.

499

1. A surety in a collector's bond is
not answerable for a sum of money
directed by an act of assembly to
be levied at a particular time, and
which was not so levied, although
he had in the court below with-
drawn his plea and confessed a
judgment Quynn vs. The State,
use of Pue, et al.
36
2. A surety in a testamentary bond is
not a competent witness in behalf
of the executor in a suit by him.
Bean's Ex'r. vs. Jenkins's Adm'r.

135

3. If a sum of money is levied by the
levy court, after the time prescrib-
ed by law for making it has pass-
ed, and the money is collected and
not paid over, the sureties of the
collector are not answerable or t.

359

Ellicott, et al vs. The Levy Court,
&c.
4. The heir at law of a deceased joint
obligor leaving a survivor, who
was his surety in the bond and
who paid the debt, is not answera-
ble to such surety in an action of
assumpsit, unless he is sued as
heir, and unless he had promised
to pay the debt of his ancestor; and
it must also be averred that suffici
ent real estate had descended to the
heir from the ancestor. Preston
vs Preston,
366

See Administration Bond 1.
Evidence 76.

SURPLUSAGE.

See Averment 2.

SURVEY.

1. The lines of an elder survey will
prevail over those of a junior sur-
vey where they interfere with each

4

2. A conveyance for a mo`ety of the
land on which the trespass com-
plained of was committed, per-
mitted to be read in evidence be-
fore it was proved that the grantor
therein had a right to convey.
The court will direct the jury, in
case it is not afterwards shown that
he had such right, that such con-
veyance is not evidence. Lowes rs-
Holbrook,
153
3 The plaintiff to recover in an ac-
tion of trespass q cf must show
title, or that he was in the actual
possession of the place where, &c.
when, &c Norwood vs. Shipley,

6. The moving of fence rails is a tres-
pass for which damages may be
recovered in an action of trespass

9.

--

545

S. In an action to recover mesne pro-
fits the plaintiff must show the best
way he can what those profits are,
either by proving the profits re-
ceived from the land, or the pro-
bable value of the land. West vs.
Hughes,
574
Where he resorts to the first
mode, and claims for profits an.
terior to the demise in the eject-
ment, he must prove the defendant
was in possession and received the
profits,
Ib.
The defendant may show
that the plaintiff was in possession
of part of the land, and received
the profits of such part,
16.
11 Where the defendant is in
possession of land of which he de-
rived no benefit, he cannot be
compelled to pay more than the
profits derived from it, if the plain.
tiff resorts to that mode of proving
the profits,

10

16.

It is not like an action of
trespass for damages; it is for the
use and occupation of land which
was recovered in an action of eject-
ment,

Ib.
13 If the plaintiff in an action for
mesne profits can prove his title ac-
crued before the time of the de-

1. A general legacy does not vest the
property bequeathed in the legatee,
without the assent of the executor,
and the executor may maintain
trover for such property against
the legatee. Wilson's Ex'x. vs.
Rine,
139
2. Whether or not a bequest to the
daughter is good evidence to the
jury in mitigation of damages in
an action of trover by the execu
trix against the husband of the
daughter, for the property be-
queathed, if there is no proof of
an assent by the executrix to such
legacy?
lb.
3. If A purchases stills of B, and
pays him the purchase money, and
B afterwards takes the stills in pos-
session, the proper remedy is trover,
and A cannot support assumpsit
against B to recover back the pur-
chase money. Kirwan vs. Raborg,
296

4. On paying the whole costs incur.
red in the action, the plaintiff may
amend his declaration from assump-
sit to trover,
Ib.
5. If chattels are delivered by the
plaintiff to the defendant for sale,
and he, instead of selling them,
appropriates them to his own use,
and refuses to account for them,
the plaintiff may sustain an action
of trover. Barton vs. White's Adm'r.

TRUST AND TRUSTEE.

See Action 2.

579

Executor and Administrator 11.
Insolvent Debtor 3.

Secret Trust.

U.

UMPIRE AND UMPIRAGE.
See Award 4.

UNDERWRITERS.

See Insurance.

USAGES AND PRACTICES.
See Land Office 2.

Promissory Note 2, 3.