
    Smith & Buchanan vs. Gorton.
    , The court ofhp > “peaks, bavin*»' eon > curred in the opinion expressed by the county court, in the bill of e,v* ctpiions, but re™ versed the jtnlf;» meat on the form of proceedings, a*warded a proce\
    
    Atonal from Baltimore County Court. Assumpsit by the appellee against the appellants. The declaration contained two counts. The_ general issue was pleaded; ami at the trial the plaintiff offered certain testimony in evidence. The defendants objected to +lio testimony being given to the jury in support of the issue joined on the second count jn the declaration,; but the county court. 
      (iL Ridgely; Ch. J.) overruled the objection* and per» tnitted the evidence to be given to the jury; The defend dants excepted; and the verdict and judgment being for the plajritiff, they appealed to thiá court..
    The cause was argued before Chase, Ch* J.' BuchAnAn,Nicholson; arid Gíntt, J. by
    
      Harper arid Purvidnce, for th’e Appellants;
    arid by
    
      Winder and Roger s^ for the Appellee.
   The Court

were' of opinion that theVe was error ini the form of proceedings, the second count in the declaration being defective; but they concurred in the Opinion expressed by the court below, in the bill of exceptions.

JUDGMENT REVERSED, AND PROCEDENDO' AWARDED.  