1, An information and conviction for swearing the same pro-
fane oath, several times, on the same day, need not complain or
convict of each of them separately, The charge in the precise
words spoken, is sufficiently specific. Johnson v. Barclay, 1
2, One conviction for several profane oaths on the same day,
is lawful, It is sufficient for that conviction to set forth the
township where the offence was committed, although it is not
named in the information.
3, A witness examined under a commission issued from this
court, must be sworn by the commissioners, their commission
being a dedimus protestatem, and a personal trust; a Justice of
the Peace has no authority to administer the oath to the witness.
Den, Perry et al. v Thompson et al.
72
4, Commissioners to take depositions in a foreign state, must
be sworn or affirmed faithfully, fairly and impartially, to execute
the commission. Their oath faithfully to execute &c. omitting
the other terms, is not sufficient.
5, It should appear on the face of the return, that the officer
before whom the commissioners were sworn, was lawfully auth-
orized to administer an oath. His styling himself a Justice of
the Peace of the county &c. is not sufficient evidence of his au-
thority.
Ib.
6, A witness who has no objection to be sworn, may not be af-
firmed to give evidence. Williamson v. Carroll,
7, Prima facie, every witness is to be sworn, and all evidence
is to be given under oath. The privilege provided by our stat-
ute substituting an affirmation, is to be extended only to such as
"shall allege" themselves conscientiously scrupulous of taking
8, Surveyors sworn into office as city officers, are not thereby
authorized to act as township officers also. Matter of High-
9, An oath in blank, is no legal oath. Each oath and the ad-
ministration thereof, must be separate, and individually sub-
scribed.
1, The term of office of Chosen Freeholders, although chosen
at the annual town meetings in March in some counties, and
April in others, commences at the time of the organization of
the Board, at their annual meeting on the second Wednesday in
May-and continues till the like organization, in the following
year. Matter of Highway,
2, Surveyors of highways, sworn into office as city officers,
are not thereby qualified as officers of the township. Matter of
Highway,
1, A devise of land &c. "to E. S. during his natural life, and
after his death to go to his male heirs, equally to be divided, after
sale of the same, by order of the Orphans' Court ;" and a codi-
cil giving “full and ample power to the Orphans' Court to make
order for the sale of part of the same property, on application of
any of the heirs, for that purpose, and notice given to the other
heirs, of the application to said court, which is thereby author-
ized to make deeds for the same, which shall be good and effec-
ual in law and equity; and the money arising thereon to be
paid to the male heirs of E. S, equally to be divided, share and
share equally," is a devise of the land to such heirs, liable to be
sold only on application of an heir, to the Orphans' Court and
the land will go to the surviving male heir, the others having
died intestate and without issue. Den, Sharp v. Humphreys
et al.
2, The Orphan's Court have no power to make such deed of
conveyance.
5, The Orphans' Court, in case of the insolvency of a dece-
dent, have no authority to reconsider and alter their final decree
settling the claims on the estate, and to change the amount of as-
sets in the administrator's hands, without notice to, or the ap-
pearance of the creditors who are interested in the estate, and
entitled to dividends thereof. Nor may the said court make any
alterations in the account, as sworn to, in such manner as car-
ries the appearance of the accountant's having sworn that which
he did not. Eakin v. Adm'r of Brick,
4, The Orphans' Court under the act of February 23, 1820
have no jurisdiction of the proceedings, until after the payment
of the dividends, by the assignees, upon the claims settled by the
Court of Common Pleas. Eakin v. Clement's Assignees, 103
5, The Orphans' Court are then to settle the final accounts of
the assignees, of the manner in which they have discharged their
6, The Orphans' Court have no power except in cases of in-
solvent estates of decedents, to settle disputed claims upon it; to
determine who are creditors, and who not, nor to adjust the
amounts due to such as are; and consequently, no authority to
decree a dividend or distribution among creditors. Miller et al.
v Petit,
OVERSEERS OF HIGHWAYS.
An Overseer of Roads, cannot be a witness in an action by
himself as such officer, to recover a penalty under the thirty-
third section of the act concerning roads. Little v Arrow-
1, It is a general rule, and always has been so, that attaining
the age of twenty-one years, is not ipso facto emancipation of a
child from his or her father, although at that age, the child may
emancipate himself by separating from his father. Overseers of
Alexandria v Overseers of Bethlehem,
2, A child by remaining with the father after the age of twen-
ty-one, may subsequently gain a settlement merely by the fath-
er's obtaining it.
3, An idiot living with his father may derive a settlement, let
his age be what it may.
Ib.
1, A purchaser by parol, of a growing crop of grain, acquires
a good title thereto, not only against the seller, but against all
others, subsequently claiming under him, whether by deed or oth-
erwise. Westbrook et al. v Eager,
2, Growing grain, and other annual fruits of annual labor, are
mere chattels, passing by parol; are assets of personal estate,
and subject to execution against goods and chattels.
1, A mutual covenant to divide proceeds of a certain crop, if
it be a partnership; is so for a special purpose, and terminates as
soon as the crop is sold, and an action lies by one of the parties
against the other, for any balance due thereon to the plaintiff,
from the defendant, without resorting to the action of account
render. Jaques et al. v Hulit et al.
2, If a promissory note be delivered to one partner of a firm,
as collecting agent of the plaintiff, his refusal to re-deliver the
note, does not make the firm liable for it. Linn et al. v Ross, 55
3, An action on partnership accounts, must be in debt, in a
justice's court. Dunham v Rappelyea,
4, A creditor of one firm cannot have a dividend upon the es-
tate of another firm, although the latter assumed to pay the debts
of the former firm, without showing its insolvency and the ex-
haustion of its assets. Scull and Thompson v Alter,
5, It is an established rule that if a partnership once existed,
it will be considered in law, (notwithstanding an agreement
among its members for a dissolution,) to be still in being and con-
tinuance, with respect to all persons acting under a bona fide be-
lief of its continuance, having no notice to the contrary. P. and
K. Turnpike Co. v Gulick et al.
6, The acts and conduct of the members of a firm, are good ev-
idence in favor of strangers not cognizant of the private objects
of a partnership.
7, To a suit on a promissory note, made to the plaintiff, by
the defendants; JH G, one of them severs, and pleads that soon
after making said note, they dissolved partnership, that T H G
assumed the debts of the firm, gave his note to J for the stock,
&c., with the plaintiff as his security for its payment; and that
the plaintiff, immediately after said dissolution, became a part;
ner with said Thomas, the other defendant, in similar business,
Held, on demurrer to said plea, that the facts therein stated do
not prove a release af the makers of said note to the plaintiff,
from their liability thereon, nor is said plea a bar to the action.
Gulick v Gulick et al.
1, It is a general rule, and always has been so, that attaining
the age of twenty-one years, is not ipso facto emancipation of a
child from his or her father, although at that age, the child may
emancipate himself by separating from his father. Overseers of
Alexandria v Overseers of Bethlehem,
2, A child by remaining with the father after the age of twen-
ty-one, may subsequently gain a settlement merely by the fath-
er's obtaining it.
3, An idiot living with his father may derive a settlement, let
his age be what it may.
4, In case of certiorari to remove the order and proceedings of
the Court of Quarter Sessions respecting paupers, that court is to
return with the writ, a statement of facts, not of the evidence be-
fore them on the hearing. North Brunswick ▾ Franklin, 535
5, A service under a written agreement between the child and
the master alone, and without seals, is not such an apprentice-
ship by indenture, as the statute requires, in order to give a set-
tlement to the servant or apprentice.
Ib.
1, The penalty for not killing a dog, under the act for the pre-
servation of sheep, Rev. L. 754, cannot be recovered against the
mere possessor of a dog. The owner only is liable for the pen-
alty. Williamson v Carroll,
2, An Overseer of roads, is not a competent witness, in a suit
by him for a penalty under the thirty-third section of the road
act. Little v Arrowsmith,
1, If the plaintiff declare on a bond made to two, and sets
up his title thereto, by an assignment from both obligees, execu-
ted by only one of them, in the names of himself and his co-obli-
gee, without his authority for so doing, his declaration is bad.—
Stevens v. Bowers,
2, A plea denying the assignment in modo et forma should con-
clude not with a verification, but to the country, and is bad on
demurrer.
3, Joint obligees of a bond, are joint-tenants only as to the
right of action, for the sake of the remedy, but not in the pro-
ceeds, which belong to the survivor and the representatives of
the deceased co-obligee.
4, A count in a declaration for conversion by the testator,
and another connt for conversion by his executors, constitute a
mis-joinder. The judgment in the former case, being de bonis
testatoris, and in the latter, de bonis propriis. Terhune v. Ex'rs
of Bray,
5, Rules to plead, on or before a specific day, or within so
many days after service thereof, expire, if not served before the
ensuing term; and a new rule must be taken before the party
can go on with his suit. On defendant's neglect to plead within
the time specified in the rule, judgment by default must be enter-
ed at the first term after the service of the rule, or a new rule
must be taken and pursued. Halsey ads. Miller,
63
6, A defendant having notice of such rule, must take timely
advantage of its not being pursued, and not suffer it to sleep sev-
|