REPORT. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, To the Honorable, the Legislature of the State of Michigan: In compliance with the requirements of statute, I have the honor to submit my Annual Report, for the year A. D. 1866. At the last April term of the Supreme Court, I appeared and argued, on the part of the defendants in error, the case of Daniel G. Grimm, plaintiff in error, against the People, defendants in error. I was assisted on the argument by E. M. Crofoot, Esq., Prosecuting Attorney of the county of Oakland. In this case, an information was filed in the Circuit Court for the county named, charging Daniel G. Grimm, (the plaintiff in error,) John Clarke, Jack Brady, James Johnson and George McManus with the crime of burglary. Grimm elected to be, and was tried separately, the trial resulting in his conviction. On this trial, said John Clarke, not being on trial, was offered first as a witness, and next to make a statement for Grimm. Objection being made to such offers, at the time of making the same, Clarke, by the ruling of the Court, was not allowed to so testify, or make the proposed statement. Also the record showed, that the trial commenced on the 17th day of January last, and continued from day to day, and ended on the 20th day of the same month, Grimm being present, as shown by the record, on the first and last days of the trial, but the record failed to show his presence between those days, which failure was alleged as error, as were also the above mentioned rulings of the Court. There were no other questions in the case. The Supreme Court held, in substance, that said Clarke, being a co-defendant, though not on trial at the time, was not entitled to testify as a |