No. 20—2416.

#### Forsythe v. Merrick.

The court decides: 1. That from the restricted nature of its jurisdiction as respects some of the matters involved, and the obvious propriety of having the Supreme Court pass upon the case, it will sub-serve no useful purpose for it to enter upon a statement of the case, or a discussion in detail of the questions presented by this record. 2. That the demurrer of plaintiffs in error to the plea in abatement filed in this court by defendants in error, should be sustained for insufficiency of said plea. 3. That the decree of the chancellor is, in view of the reasons and authorities shown and cited in the printed brief and argument of counsel for defendants in error, and under the pleadings and proofs in the cause, in accordance with law and equity.

Opinion filed Oct. 27, 1886.

Opinion

Per Curiam.

(Moran, J., took no part in the decision of this case.) Judge below, Thomas A. Moran. Attorneys, for plaintiffs in error, Mr. James E. Munroe ; for defendants in error, Mr. Edward Roby and Messrs. Boutell & Waterman.