
    Rheem against Allison.
    The Court refused to set aside an award of arbitrators, because one of them, before the business was concluded, inquired of a stranger, whether the defendant could pay a certain sum in case the decision should be against him.
    
      PHILLIPS, for the defendant,
    moved to set aside an award of arbitrators, which had been filed in this cause, on the ground that one of them had prejudged the case.
    
      1 The suit was instituted against three defendants, viz. Allison, Allen, and Badger. Allison and Allen, only, were summoned, and appeared; the return as to Badger being nil habet. A compulsory rule for arbitration was entered by the defendants, and on the 22d February, 1815, the parties met. Only two of the arbitrators appearing, a third was appointed by consent, when an adjournment took place until the next day. Several other adjournments afterwards took place. On the 3d April, 1815, the death of Allen was suggested, and on the 5th of the following July, the plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement, “ that the arbitra- “ tors in this case do postpone their award for the space of two “ months from this date, and (we) do bind ourselves to abide “ by their award, and that there shall be no appeal on either “ side.” An award for 450 dollars was filed on the 12th September 1815, from which the defendant appealed within twenty days. ; ' i ’ [
    To support the exception, several witnesses were examined, the substance of whose testimony was: that a few days before the last meeting, James Graham, one of the arbitrators, had inquired of one of the witnesses, whether Allison could pay six or seven hundred dollars, in case the decision should be against him, and added, in reply to an observation of another witness who was present at the conversation, that he supposed six or seven hundred dollars would be no object to Allison. When the arbitrators met, Allison objected to Grabamos serving, in consequence of what he had said out of doors — Graham declared he had not made up his mind, but said he would rather not serve, and went away. The other arbitrators, however, upon being urged by the plaintiff’s counsel to proceed with the business, sent for Graham, who returned and sat upon the case.
    
      
      McKean, for the plaintiff,
    insisted, that as Graham had expressed no opinion as to the merits of the controversy, had merely inquired into Allison's circumstances, had served with reluctance, and had expressly declared, that he had not made up his mind on the subject, there was nothing in his conduct to render it improper for him to sit as an arbitrator.
    
      Phillips replied,
    that it was evident from the' inquiries made by Graham respecting Allison's circumstances, that his mind had received a bias against him, and that it was altogether wrong in an arbitrator to hold conversations with strangers about a case then before him for determination. He referred to Pettit and Bayard v. Passmore, in which the Court set aside an award, because the arbitrators had examined a witness in the absence of one of the parties.
   The Court,

thinking sufficient cause had not been shewn for setting aside the award, rejected the motion.

Mr. McKean, before this motion was made, had moved to dismiss the appeal, and the Court did dismiss it,'because the parties had entered into an agreement, that neither should ap-’ peal.  