
    Taylor against Hatch.
    wffluoUmai1 lowed to be read in support of a mo-before an at-caused m tke
    SKINNER was about to read an affidavit, in support of a motion in this cause, when Walworth objected, that the affi- - davit had been taken before the attorney for the plaintiff, who was a commissioner for taking affidavits, to be read in this court. He cited the rule of the court of K. B., in England, and -3 Term Rep. 403. King v. Wallace. .
    
   Per Curiam.

The practice of the court of K. B. is, not to allow an affidavit taken before the attorney in the cause to' be read. It is a very fit and proper rule, which we shall, therefore, adopt as the practice here. As the party may, however, have been led into a mistake as to the practice, we give him leave to withdraw his motion, and to renew it again, at, the next term, on a proper affidavit. 
      
      
        Tidd's K. B. Pr. 451. But an affidavit to hold to bail may be taken before a commissioner, though attorney for the plaintiff. Tidd’s Pr. 155.
     