
    Woods against Gibson.
    NFAV-YORK,
    May, 1810
    where a jury fa? *uet of6"! retúm^of till th^ ""j'm J™3 e^lcd summoning the jury, but not fop ihe . .'¡mi cF the venire„
    
    THE sheriff of the county, to whom the venires, returnable at a circuit, were directed, went out of office a day or two before the commencement of the circuit, but after the jurors had been drawn and summoned. No venires were actually delivered to the sheriff; and it appeared to be the practice not to deliver them, before the causes are about to be called. The only question was, . . whether the late sheriff, or his successor in office, was . , , . - , entitled to the fees on the vemre.
    
   Per Curiam.

Though the late sheriff went out of office after the jury were summoned, and before the return day of the venire, and though it was not actually delivered to him, we think he is entitled to the fees for summoning the jury, but not the nine cents for returning the venire, as that service was* in fact, performed by his successor.  