
    STEELMAN against BOLTON.
    0» CERTIORARI.
    This was a proceeding by the plaintiff below, who is the defendant in this court, for two penalties under the act concerning inns and taverns, for selling liquor by small measure. The justices issued two summonses, in trespass on the case, for ten dollars each, returnable at the same time, and tried both causes together ; and the jury found a general verdict of sixteen dollars. The jurors’ names were not entered on the docket. It did not appear by the transcript, that any witnesses were sworn. It was alleged, on the part of the plaintiff in certiorari, who was the defendant below, that the whole proceeding was erroneous. That there ought to have been but one action commenced; that that action should have been an action of debt, and not case; that the plaintiff could [*] not consolidate her own actions but must pursue them separately; that a jury cannot render a verdict for a part of a penalty, but must find the whole or nothing; that the jurors’ names should have been entered on the justice’s docket; that it did not appear that any witnesses were examined, and of course there was a trial and verdict against the defendant below, without evidence; and lastly, that no judgment was entered.
    
      
      Pearson, for plaintiff.
   By the Court.

— The whole proceeding is replete with, error. Let it be set aside.  