P Page, Spafford v. Passumpsic Turn. Co., Barnet v. Pingrey v. Watkins, Pinney et al. v. Fellows et al., Powers v. Southgate et al. R Reed v. Field et al. 381| Rolfe, Treasurer of Vt. v. 734 Roxbury, Northfield v. 370 Russell v. Fillmore, 245 152 211 431 700 185 Sanborn v. Morrill, 569 Smith et al., Giddings et al. v. 519 290 548 510 S Springfield, Manchester v. Starksboro v. Hinesburgh, 490 State v. Fox, 379 State v. Lathrop, 649 State v. Shrewsbury, 618 State v. Munger, 358 State v. Whitney, 757 State v. Chandler et al., 616 State v. Freemen, 566 Stanton, Ide et al. v. 637 St. Johnsbury v. Waterford, 683 Stimpson v. Cummings, 414 Stimpson v. Cummings, 155 Stickles et al., Crane v. 786 Stoddard v. Chapin, 454 Stone, Blanchard et al., v. 82 Stoughton v. Mott, 93 Strong, Hart v. 183 Straw et al., Wainwrights v. 479 Sutton v. Burke, 525 Swanton, Pratt et al., v. 306 471 147 T Tharp v. Tharp, Thayer et al., Carpenter v. 672 Thomas v. Warner, 500 Thompson, Peck v. 42 Thurman et al., Hunt v. 741 Treasurer of Vt. v. Rolfe, 510 Tyson, Booth v. 431 Tyson v. Doe, 9 622 130 700 506 393 221 115 78 785 283 677 495 716 620 620 344 245 82 471 490 566 435 385 200 22 279 283 290 298 425 723 685 692 477 787 252 443 271 162 377 215 720 147 105 552 110 637 336 515 REPORTS. CHITTENDEN COUNTY. JANUARY TERM, 1843. PRESENT HON. CHARLES K. WILLIAMS, Chief Justice. 66 66 Assistant Justices. 66 ISAAC F. REDFIELD, MILO L. BENNETT, WILLIAM HEBARD, TREASURER OF VERMONT v. JACOB ROLFE. A recognizance entered into before the county court, by a person in custody on a criminal charge, that the respondent shall make his personal appearance before the court then sitting, and remain from time to time, and from day to day, and shall answer, and shall abide the orders and decrees of the court, and not depart without leave, is a legal and valid recognizance. SCIRE FACIAS on a recognizance entered into before the county court for the county of Chittenden, by the defendant and one Henry Hand as sureties for John Williams, in custody on a warrant from said court. The declaration having set forth an indictment against Williams-its return into court, and his arrest, and detention in custody, upon a warrant issued thereon, alleged that: "On the 4th day of September, 1839, at Burlington afore'said, by order and direction of the county court aforesaid, 'the said John Williams, as principal, and Jacob Rolfe and 'Henry Hand, as sureties, came personally before the judges ' of the court aforesaid, as by the record of said county court 'will more fully appear, and, in open court, acknowledged 'themselves jointly and severally indebted to the treasurer VOL. XV. S. R. VOL. 7. 2 1 CHITTENDEN,' of the state of Vermont in the sum of four hundred dollars, January, 1843. 'to be levied of their, and each of their goods and chattels, 'lands and tenements, and, for want thereof, upon their and ' each of their bodies, upon the condition following, to wit, that if the said John Williams, being charged, as specified ' in the said bill of indictment, shall make his personal appearance before the county court then sitting at Burlington 'aforesaid, and remain from time to time, and from day to " · ( day, and then and there answer to such matters and things as 'should then and there be objected to him in that behalf, and 'there abide such order and decree of said court, as said court 'should make in the premises, and not depart without leave 'of said court, then the said recognizance should be void 'and of no effect, but otherwise it should be and remain in 'full force and effect;-which said recognizance and the 'condition thereof being duly certified in open court, by the ' clerk of said court, and was duly received in the said county court, as by the record of said recognizance and the con'dition thereof, now remaining in the said county court at 'Burlington, manifestly appears. And although the said 'John Williams was, by order of the said court, publicly 'called in said court, to make his personal appearance before 'said court, to answer to such matters and things as should 'be objected to him in that behalf, and although the said 'Jacob Rolfe and the said Henry Hand were, also, three 'times publicly called in, and by order of, said court, to have 'the said John Williams before the said court according to 'the condition of the recognizance, yet, the said John Wil'liams neglected to appear before the said court, and the 'said Jacob Rolfe and the said Hand refused to have the 'said John Williams before the said court, but suffered the 'said recognizance to become forfeited," &c. The defendant demurred to the declaration, and judgment was rendered by the county court that the declaration was sufficient. The defendant excepted. Treasurer of V. Rolfe. Lyman & Marsh, and Charles D. Kasson for defendant. I. The recognizance is void for requiring more than the law. Treasurer v. Seaver et al. 7 Vt. R. 485. 7 Pick. R. 233. 9 Con. R. 350. In taking the recognizance, the court were in the exercise |