
    ELISHA BASSETT v. CLEMENT, AND OTHERS.
    Upon Certiorari in matter of Public Road.
    A return of a road by surveyors, must show that an absent surveyor had notice of their meeting, or such notice must appear by proof laid before the court.
    
      R. P. Thompson, for plaintiff.
    
      F. L. McCulloch, for defendants.
    The reasons relied upon in this case, were,
    1. That the proof before the court, on the application for surveyors, did not shew that the petitioners were freeholders and residents of the county.
    2. That the return of the surveyors did not show that an absent surveyor had notice of the time and place of meeting.
    3. That one of the surveyors who laid the r.oad, was sworn into office, before” a Justice of the Peace residing out of the township, in and for which, the said surveyor was appointed.
    By the Court : It must appear that the absent surveyor had notice of the time and place of meeting, by being so slated on the face of the return, or by laying proof before the court to that effect, otherwise the applicants might select some of the surveyors to execute the order, such as were deemed favorable to laying the road, and get clear of those apprehended to be unfavorable to it, by allowing them no notice of the time or place of meeting. The 2d. section of the act directs that a copy of the rule of court, appointing six surveyors, and the time and place of meeting, shall be served on each of the said surveyors at least six days previous to the time of meeting; and unless it appear to have been so served on them, the road will not appear to be laid in conformity to this act.
    
      Proceedings set aside.
     