COMMON PLEAS, Philadelphia
County:
HOLMES versus COMEGYS.
T
HIS was a Scire Facias against the Garnishee in a Foreign Attachment, upon the trial of which the confidential agent or factor, of the original Defendants who was casually attending in Court, was offered as a witness to prove effects in the hands of the Garnishee.
Levy, objected to the admission of the witness ; and contended, that he ought not to be allowed, or, at least compelled, to give evidence of matters confidentially communicated to him as an agent ; and that the Court had then no power over him as a witness, because he had not been subpœna'd to attend.
But by SHIPPEN, President:– It would be of very dangerous consequence, if it was establifhed, that a commercial agent was not amendable as a witness in a Court of Justice, in a cause against his constituent. It is straining the matter of privilege too far: and the law makes him a witness, we are too fond of getting at the truth, to permit him to excuse himself from declaring it, because he conceives, that, in point of delicacy, it would be a breach of conscience .
by the court :–Let the witness be affirmed.
PHILLIPS versus HYDE.
D
EBT upon a Replevin bond, after judgment de returno habendo in the Replevin, and thereupon a return of Elongatur. Sergeant, on the trial of the cause,offered witnesses to prove, that the goods had been tendered to the Plaintiff ; and, therefore, that the condition of the Replevin bond has been performed.
Levy
