
    John Blake, et al. vs. Franklin Baker, et al.
    Service of a subpcena upon a special Attorney, with pouter over only a portion of the property affected by the suit, is not a sufficient service to bind the principal.
    Hayes, for the plaintiff.
   In Equity. This was a motion for substituted set-vice of a subpoena. The defendant, Franklin Dextef, having left the State before the bill Was broüght, and his place of residence being unknown, this fact, together with the fact that Benjamin N. Lapham had acted as Attorney at Law of said Baker in relation to a portion of the property which was the subject matter of this suit, and also was in possession of said property, with power to dispose of it according to the provisions of a deed by which said property -fras assigned, was shown to the Court by affidavit.

The Court held that service of the subpcena upon Lap-ham, he being the agent of Baker only for a special purpose, and in regard to but a part of the property affected by the suit, would not be a sufficient service upon Baker to oblige him to make answer to the bill, or to conclude him in reference to any of his interests included in this bill.  