
    James Hindman v. James Logan.
    PROCEEDINGS to recover a demand, before a justice of the peace, who had given judgment for the plaintiff before him, were removed by certiorari into the court of Common Pleas of Washington county.
    
      Ross, for the plaintiff in error,
    filed seven exceptions to the record sent up.
    1. It does not state the ground of the demand, so as to be a bar to another suit for the same cause.
    2. If there was any cause of action, it was for rent ; and the title of land must have come in question.
    
      
      3. No summons, appearance, or confession of the defendant is stated.
    4. The plaintiff exhibited no account, nor sued out a summons, nor directed the justice to issue a summons ; the summons was issued by the justice without any authority from him.
    5. The justice was interested, and the money was claimed by him ; and the name of the plaintiff used without his consent or knowledge.
    6. The judgment was entered wrongfully and without evidence.
    7. The record is not so full and entire, as it remains before the justice. There is no summons. It is informal, &c.
    To establish some of the exceptions, the deposition of the plaintiff in error was offered.
    Young, for the defendant in error,
    objected that the witness was interested.
    
      Dall. 268, 405.
   Ross, cited Guthrie v. White, and Pinchin v. Fry;—and distinguished between evidence to a court, and evidence to a jury.

The court held the first exception sufficient to reverse the proceedings ; and ordered the money to be restored with coils.  