¶1delivered the opinion of the-court:
¶2The act of 1706, (P. L. 11, J declares, that every coroner, &c. shall be and is hereby empowered to serve and execute all writs and processes directed unto him against the marshal, &e. and also in all causes wherein the marshal is plaintiff, &c.” This act gives the power of serving writs, wherever the marshal or sheriff is concerned, to the coroner; and the only question is, whether the sheriff may not also serve such writs ? In treating of the court of the coroner, Lord Coke says, “ besides his judicial place, he has also authority ministerial, as a sheriff, &c. &c. viz: when there is just exception taken to the *471sheriff, judicial process shall be awarded to the coroner for the execution of the king’s writs, in which case- he is locum tenens vice comills; (4 Inst. 211. J Av.C in Cro. Charles. 300, it is laid down, that if the sheri*’. is either plaintiff or defendant, or one of the cogoisix-s, the writ must be directed to the coroner. (See also ¿'elk. 144; 2 Jacob's L. I). 87. 1 Plowd. 73 )
¶3By the rules of the common law then, and in my judgment, upon the sound construction of the ret. taking vio ■consideration its policy, which is to picveni. the s' cuff's acting in his own case, and regarding the remedy afforded .against his possible self-interest, it appears that the seivice ef the writ by the sheriff, in his own case, is void.
¶4The motion is therefore granted.
¶5I think the sheriff in this action being .a mere nominal plaintiff, he migdit legally serve the writ.