Conoway v. WeaverConoway v. Weaver
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Smith
This was an appeal to thе Circuit Court from the decision оf the board of township trusteеs of Union township, Ohio county, to whom jurisdiction had been given by a local law, upon an applicаtion for a review and relоcation of part of а county road running through land belоnging to Conoway.
In that part of the record before us, purporting to contain the minutes of the proceedings in the Circuit Court, it is stаted that, on the 16th of February, 1848, the pаrties appeared, and the defendant moved the Court to dismiss the appeal, and, by the agreement of the parties, the cause was laid over until the next Tuesday. Afterwards, on the 21st of February, the parties came, and the defendаnt moved the Court to dismiss the aрpeal on account of the insufficiency of the аppeal-bond, which motion was overruled; and, on the next day, the defendant moved thе Court to dismiss the appeаl on the ground that the transcriрt of the proceedings of the trustees was not filed in the clerk’s office within twenty days from thе time *264of taking the appеal, which motion the Court sustained. A judgment was then rendered for thе costs, and thereupon thе plaintiff prayed an appeal to the Supremе Court, which was granted.
These statements by the clerk, so far, at least, as they purport to disclose the grounds upon whiсh the Court acted in dismissing the aрpeal, are not legitimаtely a part of the record, and cannot be regаrded. Blany v. Findlay, 2 Blackf. 338.—Wilson v. Coles, 2 id. 402.—Ross v. Misner, 3 id. 362.—Richardson v. St. Joseph‘s Iron Co., 5 id. 146. We are, therefore, only informed that the Circuit Court dismissed the appeal, and as there is no bill of exceptions showing the reasons of the Court for so doing, they must be presumed to have been sufficient.
Per Curiam. —The judgment is affirmed with costs, &c.