5. These defendants further answering show to the court that for many years the mill at Byron had become out of repair and was not operated as a mill; that later, to-wit, twenty years ago, the mill was burned and the property remained useless for many years, but defendants admit that at the present time the plaintiff has a little feed mill on the site of the mill property west of the highway and said mill gets Its power to some extent from the race connected with the Shiawassee River, but the most of the water from the said river goes through the dam where the saw mill race formerly existed and is not upon any property claimed by the plaintiff.

6. These defendants further answering deny that they occupy any land or claim interest in any land except such lands as they and their grantors have had conveyances of and under which they have claimed title and have been in the open, peaceable, continuous, notorious and hostile possession for more than thirty years, and they deny that the plaintiff or his grantors have had or had any right to have any possession or use of their property during the past thirty years.

7. Further answering, the said Elsie McGee avers, and the other defendants herein upon information and belief aver, that she is in possession of all the land between the Grand River Road, the race of the Byron mill property, the pond of the Byron mill property, and the race used for a saw mill, all on section twenty-four in the Township of Burns; that the plaintiff has a right to drive over the same to go to his mill pond but has no other right in and to said property, and plaintiff and his grantors have not been in possession of any part of it, other than herein stated, for more than forty years.

8. Further answering, the said Charles Fritz and Henrietta Fritz say that they are in possession and have the ownership of a strip of land bounded on the north by the land of Elsie McGee, on the east by the Byron mill pond, on the south by the old bed of the north branch of the Shiawassee River and by land of these other defendants, and on the west by the Grand River Road, which does not now and never did belong to said plaintiff or his grantors and in which plaintiff or his grantors have never had any possession or control.

9. Further answering, the said Emma Spangenberger, John M. Ripley, Minnie Ripley, Edgar Caulkins, Kilea Caulkins, Robert Coats, Lucy Kirkendol, Henry Faul and Frances Campbell say that they own land by conveyances from their grantors which is bounded on one side by the Byron mill pond and the Shiawassee River, and they show to the court that they and their grantors have occupied such land for more than thirty years last past under a claim of title; that their occupancy has been continuous, open, peaceable, notorious and hostile; that the plaintiff has not now and never has had any interest in said land and is not entitled to any relief against these defendants. On the contrary they show to the court that the claiming by the plaintiff of some paper title to these premises, if he has such, is a cloud upon their title which they ask to have removed, and they also show to the court that the Byron mill pond, so-called, being nothing but a basin or miasmatic pool, breeding stench and filth and threatening the health of all of these defendants, is a menace to the community and a public nuisance which they believe in equity they are entitled to have abated and removed, and they ask that under the final order of this court that such nuisance be abated and the health of the community protected therefrom.

10. Further answering, the said Perry Hadsell and Helen Hadsell say that the lands occupied by them are lands which have come to them from and through various conveyances and are lands which they and their grantors have held as owners with open, notorious, peaceable and continuous possession for more than fifty years; that the plaintiff has no right to the possession thereof, and if his deed, or any deeds, pretends to cover said lands, they ask to have such deed cancelled and removed from the title of their property, and they ask to have the miasmatic nuisance known as the Byron mill pond abated and the health of the community protected against a spot which is continually breeding disease and endangering the public health.

11. And the defendant Emma Spangenberger shows to the court that she has a deed of real estate covering the land between the Grand River Road on the south and the Byron mill pond and the north branch of the Shiawassee River on the north; that such land is valuable farming land and that she and her grantors have been in open, notorious, peaceable, continuous and hostile possession of the land that she now occupies for more than forty years last past; that she has paid taxes thereon and improved it and was not aware that by doing so she was encroaching upon anybody's frog pond or miasmatic mud-hole; that plaintiff or his grantors have not had or been in the possession of any of the property which she now occupies, and she shows to the court that the mill pond, so-called, except in time of freshet or high water, is a menace to public health, and she asks that when a final decree is made in this cause that the same be abated as a nuisance kept and mintained by the plaintiff.

12. And the defendants Ernest Kelsey and Mary Kelsey show the court that a part of their farm is on the north side of the Grand River Road and adjoining the north branch of the Shiawassee River; that it was purchased by their relatives and grantors more than forty years ago and for the express purpose of having the river as a place to water their stock; that the banks of the Shiawassee River along their side are from five to twenty feet high; that the river at all times is confined within its banks; and that the plaintiff at no time has had possession of, nor did his grantors ever own any right or interest in their said property; and they aver the truth to be that the plaintiff is not now and never has had any proprietary right in the Shiawassee River as such; that it is a public stream and as such the plaintiff has only a right to use the water coming from said river in common with all of the defendants whose lands adjoin said river and who have had the use thereof for such purposes as they saw fit for the past fifty years, and they show to the court that they and their grantors have also been in open, notorious, peaceable, continuous and hostile possession of all of said land to the center of said river to the north of their property for the last fifty years; and they deny that the plaintiff has any color of title or right of possession to any part of said land.