
    Samuel Broughton against David Ward and Abel Wolcott.
    Where apriitity is shewn be- , tween several defendants ill trespass, the words or acts of any one of them may Lw exhibited in evidence as proof of tire trespass.
    TRESPASS for taking one yoke of oxen, a mare' and colt. General issue. Trial per pais.
    
    
      John Coofc, for the plaintiff,
    stated, that on the 6th of April, 1798, the defendants purchased out two writs of attachment, one in'each of their names, and both against the present plaintiff and one Francis. These writs were issued by and made returnable before Mr. Justice Button, on the fourteenth of the same April. They were served on Broughton and 
      Francis the 9th of the same month, and by connivance of the then plaintiffs, (now defendants,) altered and made returnable on the 19th of April aforesaid, The Justice held his Court on the fourteenth of April, and not noticing the alteration in the writs, defaulted Broughton and Francis, rendered judgment, and issued executions in both actions. The executions were put into the hands of a constable to serve and return ; who levied the execution in the name of David Ward upon the mare and colt, and that in the name of Abel Wolcott upon the oxen described in the declaration. The property was sold at public auction, and the avails paid to the present defendants.
    Mr. Justice was sworn. He exhibited the two writs. The alterations suggested by the counsel were apparent. The writs of execution recited each a judgment rendered on the fourteenth of April, 1798, and were dated the 24th of April, 1798. The Justice testified, that the two writs of attachment were brought to him to sign by the defendant Woleott, at which time they were made returnable on the fourteenth day of April, 1798; and on that day he rendered the several judgments on default, and granted ■the executions on the 24th of April, which he delivered to Ward, the other defendant. That on the nineteenth of April, 1798, he met Broughton, the present plaintiff, with Francis, and they told him the} were going to his house to attend Court; that he then informed them he had rendered judgment against them in both suits, on the 14th of April.
    
    
      
      Chauncey Langdon, for defendants,
    now objected to the several writs of attachment and of execution going to the Jury. The matter in issue is a joint trespass; their whole shewing several trespasses.
    
      John Cook, for plaintiff. ■
    
      Chaumcey Langdon, for defendants.
   Sed per Curiam.

There is sufficient privity shewn already in evidence between the present defendants. The acts of each, as combining in this joint trespass, may be shewn.

Further evidence was exhibited, shewing that the writs of attachment were purchased out at the instigation of Francis, who, before the service upon Broughton, altered himself the days of the returns with the privity of the present defendants, and after-wards turned out the oxen, &c. the property of Broughton, to satisfy the executions.

The Court inquired, if the. defendants relied upon impeaching the credibility of the witnesses; and observed, that if their testimony could not be shaken, the defendants must be without available defence.

Verdict for plaintiff.  