
    September, 1808.
    Nathan Smith against Jacob Barker.
    An affidavit in support of a motion to put off a cause for the absence ⅜ of a ■witness, cannot be explained by matters extrinsic*
    GODDARD, in support of a motion for the continuance of this cause, read an affidavit of the absence of a witness.
    Daggett, contra,
    contended, that there had been negligence in procuring the attendance of the witness.
    
      Goddard
    
    was about to make some remarks in explanation; when he was interrupted by
   Livingston, J.

When an affidavit is relied upon, the court will not go out of it. I shall, therefore, decline hearing any ore tenus explanation.

The name of the witness must always be disclosed in the affidavit, unless there are circumstances to show that the party, without any fault of his, was unable to learn his name.

Hereafter, when a cause is ready for trial, no application for a continuance will be successful, unless upon an affidavit conformable to the English practice. His honour remarked upon the inconveniences of putting off a cause ready for trial, in this court; and said, the English courts, and the courts in those states which follow the English practice, were growing more strict upon this subject.  