Bayard’s Notebook, 166.[*]

STATE v. EMERY.[2]

Court of Quarter Sessions of Delaware, Kent County.
November, 1796.

[*] This case is also reported in Rodney’s Notes,
Dec. 1, 1796.
[2] In the account of this case in Rodney’s Notes the name is spelled “Emory.”

Page 416

Upon the trial Bedwel Maxwell, offered as witness for defendant, being sworn on the voir dire, said he had an indenture upon the defendant for a term of years and expected to pay the fine and fees in case the defendant was convicted. Upon which, Bayard (who prosecuted for the Attorney General) objected to the competency of the witness on the ground of interest.

Miller contended that the objection went too far. It would prevent any master being a witness for his servant. That in the present case the master was the only person acquainted with the transaction and must be admitted ex necessitate.

PER CURIAM.

This is an indictment for an assault and battery. The party on whom the assault and battery was committed is for the convenience of public justice admitted as a witness. It appears from what he says no third person was present upon the occasion of the assault and battery but the witness now offered, and we therefore conceive that justice requires that the witness should be admitted.

Witness admitted.