
    Ogden against Parks.
    Where jurors, CourtJuSt'are “he 1Ien|ro!ind that they are not freeliolders, the fact may be tried by an examijurors “them! selves, under o.ath.
    IN ERROR, on certiorari, to a Justice’s Court. The cause was tried in the Court below, before a jury* jn order to complete the jury, two tales-men were sum-r J moned, and when they appeared, the defendant below ob«> . . jected to them as not being freeholders, and requested the Justice to examine them upon oath, as to that fact. This ' the Justice refused ; hut inquired of the jurors whether, they were freeholders, to, which they answered in the affirmalive, and were then sworn as jurors to try the cause. A verdict and judgment wére rendered for the plaintiff helow, who is the defendant in error.
   Per Curiam.

That the jurors were not freeholders was undoubtedly a good ground of challenge, and the question is, how it was to be proved. The jurors themselves had no interest in the question, and were competent witnesses as to that fact. This sudden and unexpected occurrence at the trial cannot be guarded against, or be met in any other way ; and from the necessity of the case, this kind of evidence must he resorted to, or the objection, though well founded, can seldom avail. The Justice, therefore, erred, and the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.  