
    Mayo and Keele vs. Dickens.
    The supreme court, uuder the act of 1809, ch. 126, sec. 9, hits no jurisdiction of a cause transferred by consent to that court, unless an agreed statement of the facts is made by the parties and made , a part of the record.
    In this case judgment had been rendered in the county court, from which the plaintiff prosecuted an appeal in error to the circuit court, and while the cause was pending there, the parties came into court, and "by their agreement and consent, it was ordered by the court that the cause be transferred to this court.” There was no agreed statement of the facts in the record. The defendant in error moved to strike the cause from the docket.
    
      Wm. Stoddart and M. Brown, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      John D. Martin, for defendant in error.
   Green, J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is not the description of case which, by the act of 1809, ch. 126, sec. 9, may, by the consent of parties, be adjourned to the supréme court for decision. Those are agreed cases, cases where the facts are agreed to by the parties, and which are to be determined upon the facts so agreed. These may be adjourned by consent to this court. But of the other cases this court cannot acquire jurisdiction by consent. It will therefore be dismissed, and each party will pay half the costs of this court.

Suit dismissed.  