
    SARAH SCHENCK vs. RESCARICK AYERS.
    An affidavit made by an appellant, setting forth, “that he thinks he has a sufficient cause for an appeal, and that the same is not intended for delay or vexation,” does not conform to the act o£ November 23d, 1821, and is insufficient.
    This was a certiorari removing a judgment obtained in the Common Pleas of the county of Middlesex, upon an appeal.
    
      Hamilton for plaintiff in certiorari,
    moved to reverse the judgment, because the affidavit made by the appellant was defective, and did not conform to the requirements of the act. He read the affidavit in the following words: Middlesex, ss: The defendant, Rescarick Ayers, maketh oath, that he thinks he has a sufficient cause for an appeal, and that the same is not intended for delay or vexation.” Sworn and subscribed, &c.
    
      Scott, contra.
   By the Court.

The judgment must be reversed. The affidavit does not conform to the provisions of the act of November 23,1821.  