
    Mansfield versus Rounds. Rounds versus Davis.
    No appeal lies to the Supreme Judicial Court from a judgment of the District Court, upon an agreed statement of facts, in a suit commenced before a Municipal Court or a justice of the peace.
    The first suit was a libel, commenced in the Municipal Court, upon the impounding of a cow. One Hill was the impounder. Defendant was the pound keeper. The case comes into this court by appeal, from the judgment of the District Court, on agreed facts.
    
      Peters, for the plaintiff.
    
      Sanborn, for defendant.
   Tenney, J.,

orally.—Our advice, if it were offered, would be unfavorable to the maintenance of the libel, because it is not brought in the name of the impounder. R. S. chap. 30, sect. 16. But we can only dismiss the case. It is not rightfully in this court. It was commenced in the Municipal Court, and by appeal carried into the District Court. From the judgment of that court, upon an agreed statement of facts, an appeal to this court was taken. From a judgment so rendered in a suit, appealed from a Municipal Court or justice of the peace, a further appeal does not lie. Exceptions would have been the proper course. Appeal dismissed.

The second suit was replevin of a swine which had been impounded, having been found going at large. An objection was taken to the impounder’s certificate, because it did not allege that the swine was found going at large “ without a keeper.”

The case was commenced in the Municipal Court, thence appealed to the District Court, and comes here upon an appeal taken to the judgment of the District Court, upon an agreed statement.

Tenney, J., orally,—after expressing an impression unfavorable to the defence of the suit, because of the omission, to allege that the animal was “ without a keeper,” directed,, for the reasons mentioned in the preceding case, that

the action be dismissed.  