
    Carroll against M‘Whorter.
    
      Columbia,
    
    1802.
    When a witness supposed to be Interested in a cause has a release given him, he is not to be confined to a particular pointin which it was stated his materiality consisted, but may be examined ge-nerallyon every point-
    MOTION for a new trial.
    In this case a witness for the plaintiff, who was supposed' to be interested in the cause, hada release executed and tendered to him, in order to make him a competent witness. After the release was delivered, and the oath administered, it was insisted that he should be confined in his testimony to a particular point in the case, in which, it was said, the materiality of his testimony consisted, and not be examined on any other one ; and the presiding judge ruled it so, in consequence of which there was a verdict for defendant.
   This was a motion for a new trial, on the ground of a mistake of the judge upon the point of law ; when, after argument, it was resolved, that whenever a witness was offered by either party, and an objection was made to hrs competence on the ground of interest, and a release was given him to make him competent, in every such case he is exactly upon the footing of every other witness sworn in a cause, and ought not to be confined to any particular point, but may be examined on every point necessary respecting the merits on either side, and that it had been so ruled in the case of Luyten and Hay good, in 1798.

Rule for setting aside the verdict, and for a new trial, made absolute.

All the Judges preserit.  