
    Strong’s Executors against Finch.
    
      December, 1824.
    A legate not competent witnessso long as his legacy is subject to 3 n omen. A legatee not competent
   JUDGE Gayle

delivered the opinion of the Court.

On die trial in the Circuit Court, James A. Torbert, who was a defendant as executor of Strong, was offered as a, wnness ; being sworn on his Voire Dire, he stated that he jia(j man-ied one of the legatees of the testator, and had received his wife’s legacy — that he had no interest in the general residuum — that he could not say whether the estate would be sufficient to pay all the debts without abatement of the legacies — that if the debts due to the estate could be collected, the estate would be sufficient to pay the debts. The Circuit Court decided that he was incompetent ; the defendants excepted, and assign this matter here as Error.

The witness had a direct interest in the collection of the debts and in protecting the estate in any action against the .executors, Whether the legacy which he had received should be abated or not, depended on the amount of the demands or judgments against the estate. He was therefore incompetent.

Crawford and Hitchcock for appellants,

cited 2 Mun. 49. Phillips’ Eyidence, 41. 5 John. 256. 1 Hen. and Mun. 154.- Peake’s Ev. 144.

Ruffin for appellee,

cited 2 Mun. 452.

Let the judgment be affimied.

The Chief Justice having presided in the Court below, did not sit.  