Difference between revisions of ".MzYwMjc.MTI2ODc5"

From Transcribe Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "of the fact in the cause Viz: that of David")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
of the fact in the cause Viz: that of David
+
of the fact in the cause Viz: that of David Bird the Juror but this relation from the bar is no more evidence than the hearsay relation of Bollar. The dearth of testimony on this subject may have arisen in some measure from the vague change in the Bill.  From Bird's evidence it would seem that the Ptl at law had told him, on the morning before the trial was concluded, to try his cause according to evidence, and not hearsay; and that the conversation was casual, as they passed each other in the street. Whether publick or private don't appear. Though there was nothing proper in the instruction, it certainly came from an improper quarter. And I should have no hesitation, if I had the power to punish the person who gave it. But does it so compleatly vitiate the Verdict as to compel this Court to set it aside? I cannot think so. And, when this whole record is inspected (such as one as I hope I shall never again be called upon to examine, ,or again compelled to reprehend) when the nature of the charge agt. the Ptl. at law & the manner in which it has been defended, are considered; and that a different decision, however obtained, would render him infamous for life, a situation in which from the evidence before me, so far as I have thought myself at liberty to form an opinion of it, he ought not to be placed - when in fire from the Temper of Spirit in which the parties have come into this Court, there is every reason to apprehend a most unjustifiable struggle for oaths of Victory, should a new trail be granted, I cannot think it my duty to award one. I will only add that {illegible} there is, as in the present case, a great continuity of testimony, it is the province of a Jury to weigh it; and that they are also the proper judges of the quantum of damages.
 +
Motion to reinstate refused & Bill dism'd with costs.
 +
 
 +
Bollar & McClintick } Decree

Revision as of 17:18, 24 January 2022

of the fact in the cause Viz: that of David Bird the Juror but this relation from the bar is no more evidence than the hearsay relation of Bollar. The dearth of testimony on this subject may have arisen in some measure from the vague change in the Bill. From Bird's evidence it would seem that the Ptl at law had told him, on the morning before the trial was concluded, to try his cause according to evidence, and not hearsay; and that the conversation was casual, as they passed each other in the street. Whether publick or private don't appear. Though there was nothing proper in the instruction, it certainly came from an improper quarter. And I should have no hesitation, if I had the power to punish the person who gave it. But does it so compleatly vitiate the Verdict as to compel this Court to set it aside? I cannot think so. And, when this whole record is inspected (such as one as I hope I shall never again be called upon to examine, ,or again compelled to reprehend) when the nature of the charge agt. the Ptl. at law & the manner in which it has been defended, are considered; and that a different decision, however obtained, would render him infamous for life, a situation in which from the evidence before me, so far as I have thought myself at liberty to form an opinion of it, he ought not to be placed - when in fire from the Temper of Spirit in which the parties have come into this Court, there is every reason to apprehend a most unjustifiable struggle for oaths of Victory, should a new trail be granted, I cannot think it my duty to award one. I will only add that {illegible} there is, as in the present case, a great continuity of testimony, it is the province of a Jury to weigh it; and that they are also the proper judges of the quantum of damages. Motion to reinstate refused & Bill dism'd with costs.

Bollar & McClintick } Decree