
    Case No. 13,945.
    THOMPSON v. CARBERY.
    [2 Cranch, C. C. 35.] 
    
    Circuit Court, District of Columbia.
    Dec. Term, 1811.
    Witness — Competency—Interest—Surety on Replevin-Bond.
    A surety in a replevin-bond is not a competent witness for the plaintiff in replevin, although he has an indemnifying bond.
    [See Case No. 13,946.]
    Replevin. Ignatius Middleton, one of tbe sureties in tbe replevin-bond, being sworn in chief, and asked if he was interested in the cause, said he was not. He was then examined and cross-examined. It was afterward discovered by the defendant’s counsel that he was a surety in the replevin-bond. He acknowledged himself to be the person, but said he nad a bond of indemnification, which he produced. The plaintiff then called him again, to examine him further. The defendant objected, and THE COURT refused to suffer him to be further examined; and told the jury that what he had already testified was not evidence.
     