
    Horton against Horton.
    ,. Th® f®PaIation of the jury after agreeverdicTis * “ cause *r set-verdict' #tS
    „ Aliter, if there is the slightest suspicion that their separation was abused, to the ^r”y of 1,10
    J. R. Lawrence, moved to set aside the verdict.- and for 1 7 a new trial, on the ground of the miseoflduct of the jury, who agreed upon their verdict while the Court were at dinner, and without the consent or knowledge of either party, dispersed add obtained their own dinners, and returned into Court at the opening thereof in the afternoon.
    
      J. A. Collier, contra,
    cited Smith v. Thompson, (1 Cowen’s Rep. 221,) and note (a) there, where all the cases are collected. The result of these are, that though the dispersion of the jury may be a contempt of Court, for which the jury are punishable, yet it is not such an irregularity as will be a cause for setting' aside the verdict.
   The Court

were of this opinion. They remarked that if the slightest suspicion had appeared, that the privilege which the jury had taken had been, abused to the injury of the party, the verdict should be set aside, but none such was shown or even insinuated.

Motion denied.  