Bayard’s Notebook, 198.[*]
Court of Common Pleas of Delaware, Kent County.
May 15, 1797.
Page 440
The plaintiffs sold 275 bushels of wheat to the defendant. The defendant gave to the plaintiffs a note stating the quantity and weight of the wheat, and that it was purchased at the rate of 18/6 per bushel. This note was signed by the defendant simply in his own name.
William Marshall was offered as a witness for the defendant, and it was admitted that the defendant had bought the wheat for him as his agent or factor.
It was objected that the witness had a plain and direct interest in the event of the cause and therefore incompetent. In answer it was said that the witness was called to charge himself by proving that the wheat was bought for him, and that whatever was recoverable he alone was answerable for. The counsel cited Cowp. 70-71, 1 Str. 35, 1 Term 164, 3 Term 27. Peake 6.
PER CURIAM.
We have listened patiently to the argument in this case, though we have had no doubt as to our decision. The defendant having made a general purchase of the wheat and signed a note accordingly, though he may be agent for another, is liable to this action; but, it being admitted that the purchase was made for the witness, he has clearly an interest in the suit. Nay, it may be considered as his suit. He will be answerable for what is recovered and of consequence is interested to defeat the recovery or to lessen the amount of damages.
Witness rejected.
The Court in their charge to the jury ruled that the plaintiffs were entitled to interest or damages at that rate from the time the wheat ought to have been paid for.
Ridgely and Bayard for plaintiffs. Miller an Rodney for defendant.
Page 441