
    David Dunbar against Nathan Parks.
    A Petit Juror may be sworn and testify as a witness of facts which he may know relative to the cause in issue; but he must not be asked a question the answer to which may indicate his opinion of the merits of the cause.
    THE plaintiff brought trover for a horse. On the trial of the issue to the Jury, after the examination of all the witnesses on the stand, and before argument, Mr. Sias, one of the Jurors, observed to the Court, that he knew some matters which had relation to the cause; and requested information whether it would be improper for him to communicate his knowledge to his brethren of the panel after they were charged, and should retire to the Jury-room.
    
      
      Curia. As the Juror had a doubt in his mind relative to his conduct, it is highly commendable in him to apply to the Court for advice. Let the witness’s oath be administered to him.
    He was accordingly sworn, and testified, standing in the Jury-box, to a material fact.
    Upon his cross-examination,
    
      John Mattocks, counsel for the plaintiff,
    put a question to the witness, the answer to which would indicate for which party as a Juror he would eventually decide.
    
      John Mattocks, for plaintiff.
    
      William Griswold, for defendant.
   Sed per Curiam.

This must not be suffered. Examine the witness solely as to facts, and such as came to his knowledge before he was sworn as a Juror.  