
    Credit against Brown.
    In an aciiosi of trespass Col1 killing a dogv; the plaintiff proved thai the defendants confessed he killed the plaintiff’s dog(j who assaulted him in the highway, 5zc„
    It was that the con» fession mnsú be taken alte» gether, and amounted ton justification.
    IN ERB.ORs on certiorari, from a justice’s court; Brown sited Credit, before the justice, in trespass, for killing the plaintiff’s dog. The defendant pleaded not guilty. There was a trial by jury. The plaintiff proved that the defendant confessed that he shot the plaintiff’s dog, who assaulted him in the main road; and the defendant, at the trial, also confessed the fact, and the necessity of killing the dog.
    The jury gave a verdict for the which the justice gave judgment. for three dollars, on
   Per Curiam.

There was no proof by which to charge the defendant, except his own confession, which the jury ought to have taken altogether, and not to have charged him with killing the dog) without giving due weight to what the defendant said, at the same time, in justification. He killed the dog, but he did so, because the dog assaulted him, in the night, in the highway. It was, therefore, a justifiable act, and the verdict of the jury was against, law and evidence.

Judgment reversed. -  