Eaton v. Peck
26 Mich. 57
Mich.
1872
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

We find no error in this record. The first objection *60taken, is disposed of by tbe case of Arnold v. Nye, 23 Mich., 286; and the second to onr comprehension, raises only a question of identity of the persons to whom the commission was issued and those who executed it, which, we think, is settled by the return.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.