
    HOLLER against FFIRTH.
    OH CERTIORARI.
    The action before the justice, was brought by Ffirth on the timber act, for several penalties, for cutting timber. On the trial, the defendant below offered a witness, who was objected to by the plaintiff, and rejected by the justice; who assigns the following reasons for doing it: That the witness offered, had been convicted by a jury of twelve men, of cutting wood on the same land, and at the same time that the defendant was cutting.
   By the Court.

The objection to this witness must have been on the ground of interest, for it never could have been pretended that a conviction of cutting wood, even under the timber act, would render a person infamous, and on that ground disqualify him as witness. As to his interest, certainly none [*] appears; there might have been a bias on his mind, which ought to have affected his credit, but not such as to destroy his competency. The justice therefore erred in refusing to admit him as a witness, and for this cause, judgment must be

Reversed.  