We are grateful to Judge FELCH, not only for his public services, but for his pure example; and as a souvenir of the times when the office sought the man, and not the man the office, we leave you his portrait. How grandly does his official life exemplify the sentiments of Lord Mansfield when he said, "I do not affect to scorn the opinion of mankind; I wish earnestly for popularity; but I will tell you how I will obtain it: I will have that popularity which follows, and not that which is run after,”—a sentiment worthy of the great man who uttered it, a sentiment that has inspired the political life of the venerable man we honor to-day, and which should control the lives of all ambitious men. Chief Justice MCGRATH, upon behalf of the Court, responded as follows: Gentlemen of the Bar of Calhoun County, and Gentlemen of the Bar of Michigan: From views heretofore freely expressed by my associates, I can safely say that the Court fully concurs in all that has been said respecting the subject of this portrait. A history of our State that omitted the part taken by Governor FELCH would be far from correct, and no portrait gallery of the public men of Michigan would be complete unless the portrait of ALPHEUS FELCH were conspicuous therein. Governor FELCH was active in public life during the formative period of the jurisprudence of the State, and of its statutory and constitutional history. He not only took an active part in the formulation of the statutes and jurisprudence of the Commonwealth, but he was an important factor in the recognition and establishment of those fundamental principles which underlie decision, statute, and constitution. Books are, after all, but depositaries, and statutes and constitutions are but crystalizations. Free man, in discussing the English constitution, says of Magna Charta, the Petition of Rights, and the Bill of Rights, that "none of these gave itself out as the enactment of anything new. All claimed to set forth those rights of Englishmen which were already old." The public career of Governor FELCH has been, perhaps, the most varied of any public man of our State. He came to the State in 1833, having been admitted to the bar in Bangor, Maine. He served as a member of the Legislature in 1835 and 1837; was appointed bank commissioner in 1838, and served as such for two years. He afterwards served as Auditor General for a short period; was appointed as one of the Justices of this Court in 1842, and served until 1846, when he assumed the duties of Governor, to which office he had been elected, resigning that position in 1847 upon his election to the Senate of the United States, in which position he served until 1853. While Senator he was chairman of the committee on public lands. He was afterwards appointed by President Pierce as commissioner to settle Spanish and Mexican land claims. The work of the commission, of which he was president, involved many important questions and decisions, and its reports fill 40 large volumes. The work was finished in 1856, and for some years thereafter Governor FELCH was law professor at our own University, the pride of Michigan. The public life of this distinguished gentleman is an open book. It but reflects the scholarly and Christian gentleman, the conscientious and profound lawyer, and the citizen whose life and conduct have ever been surcharged with a keen appreciation of the privileges and duties of American citizenship. These elements of character are essential to the best citizenship, and the loftiest statesmanship is the product of the best citizenship. There are many incidents of such a life worthy of mention, but it is the harmonious whole that challenges our admiration. Humboldt says that "the aim of every man should be the highest and most harmonious development of his powers to a complete and consistent whole." As Jean Paul Richter puts it, "to make as much out of one's self as could be made out of the stuff." A writer has said of Alfred the Great that "no other man on record has ever so thoroughly united all the virtues of the ruler and the private man. In no other man on record were so many virtues disfigured by so little alloy." It may be truthfully said of ALPHEUS FELCH that in him have been united the virtues of the good citizen, the upright lawyer and jurist, and the faithful legislator and executive. Those elements of character which have distinguished him as a man have characterized his entire career, have contributed to the efficiency of his service to the State, and have dignified every station that he has been called upon to fill. The influence of such a life unconsciously permeates all life. Every step in such a career has been in the direction of moral and intellectual progress, and the advancement of the highest and best interests of the State. We gratefully accept the portrait of Governor FELCH; and tender thanks to the bar of Calhoun county for the courtesy that has resulted in this occasion. APRIL TERM, 1894.* THE IOSCO COUNTY SAVINGS BANK V. ORLANDO M. Attachment-Dissolution- Evidence - Findings of circuit judge. 1. On the hearing of an application for the dissolution of an attachment, the burden of proof is upon the plaintiff to sustain the averments in the affidavit for the writ as to the existence of the statutory causes authorizing its issuance; and the conclusion of the circuit judge as to the truth of said averments is not reviewable, if there is any testimony warranting the same.1 * Continued from Vol. 99. 1 DISSOLUTION OF ATTACHMENTS. For cases bearing upon the proper construction of and practice under Act No. 125, Laws of 1851 (How. Stat. §§ 8026-8029), which authorizes any defendant whose property may be attached to apply to the judge of the circuit court or the circuit court commissioner of the county where the writ of attachment issued for a dissolution of such attachment, and of Act No. 247, Laws of 1881 (How. Stat. § 8030), which provides for an appeal from the determination, order, or judgment of any circuit court commissioner under the provisions of the act first cited, see: Constitutionality of Act. 1. Chandler v. Nash, 5 Mich. 409, holding that Act No. 84, Laws of 1853, which attempted to authorize dissolution proceedings before a notary public in certain cases, was in conflict with section 1, art. 6, of the Constitution, which vests the judicial power in one Supreme Court, in circuit courts, in probate courts, and in justices of the peace, and in such municipal courts as may be established by the Legislature in cities. 2. Edgarton v. Hinchman, 7 Mich. 352, holding that in conferring power upon circuit court commissioners to dissolve attachments the act does not give powers beyond those which may properly be exercised by a circuit judge at chambers, and therefore is not unconstitutional. Who May Apply for Dissolution. 1. Paddock v. Matthews, 3 Mich. 18, holding that a defendant who secures the release, and restoration of the attached property, |