
    Vielie ads. Towers.
    THIS was an aólion of affault and battery, and a verdift for plaintiff at the circuit, for fix cents damages and fix cents coils. A certificate was given by the judge who prefided at the trial, to entitle the plaintiffs to full colls, but it was not given at the trial.
    
    
      Woodworth for the defendant, under a motion that the certificate of the judge be vacated, now brought up the queftion whether this certificate is conformable to the 5th feftion of the Aft entitled, “ An Aft “ to reduce the laws concerning colts into one “ ilatute,” palled the 12th of February 1787. He contended, that agreeable to this Aft the certificate muff be granted by the Judge fedente curia, and could not be granted with any effeft afterwards ; fuch he faid was the Englilh ilatute, and fuch their praftice under it.
   Per Curiam.

The Statute enafts, u That in all “ aftions of trefpafs and affault and battery, com- “ menced or profecuted in the Supreme Court, e: wherein the Judge at the trial of the caufe, ihall “ not find and certify under his hand upon the “ back of the record, that an affault and battery “ was fufficiently proved, or that the freehold or title of the land mentioned in the plaintiff’s de-H claration, was chiefly in queftion, the plaintiff in fuch aftion, in cafe the jury fhall find the da-u mages to be under forty {trillings, fhall not re- “ cover or obtain more coils of fuit than the da-<e mages fo found fhall amount to.” This provi-fion being reafonably interpreted, means only that the certificate fhould be given by the judge who frejiied at the trial, and not that the aft of making out the certificate fhould be performed then.  