COMMON PLEAS, Philadelphia
County:
CHAPLIN verʃus KIRWAN.
T
HE Referrees in this cafe, had allowed ex parte evidence to be given, of the current price of Coach-maker's work, at the time when the caufe of action occured. For this reafon, the Defendant moved to fet afide their report.
And by the court: If Referrees make enquiry abroad, to afcertain for their own fatisfaction, the price of work, or the truth of any other matter, which may be faid, comparatively, to be of a public nature, this, fo tar from being irregular, would be highly commendable. But it is a very different cafe, when they proceed feparately to examine a witnefs, who has been produced by one of the parties, although the evidence relates only to thofe general points. The adverfe parties fhould have an opportunity of crofs examining the witnefs.
The Report fet afide.
HOOTON verʃus WILL.
I
T was ruled in this caufe, that a judgment fhall not relate to the firft day of a Term, fo as to cut out a foreign attachment.
