
    James Rice versus Samuel Wallace.
    Instructions to the jury cannot be excepted to by the party, in whose favor they were given.
    Exceptions from the District Court, Allen, J.
    Assumpsit on an account annexed. There was also a count on an award of referees.
    At the trial, it appeared that the defendant employed the plaintiff to cut a quantity of hay for a stipulated price ; that the claim had been referred to three referees, who examined the hay and awarded the sum to be paid; and notified the defendant thereof, before the commencement of this suit.
    
      It also appeared that the plaintiff made some statements to the referees concerning the matter, in the absence of the other party, and it was testified by one of the referees that the statements did not in any way affect the award.
    The Court instructed the jury, that if the plaintiff was present and made material statements, it would render the award invalid. Verdict for plaintiff.
    
      J. Appleton &f Mudgett, for defendant,
    to obtain a new trial, relied upon Dobson v. Groves, 6 Queen’s Bench, 637, cited in Kinne’s Comp. 1848, p. 14.
    
      Waterhouse, for plaintiff.
   Wells, J.

— There does not appear to be any cause for exceptions, on the part of the defendant, for the instruction given was favorable to him.

Exceptions overruled and judgment on the verdict.  