
    Bradley v. Couch.
    In an action upon the statute for a counterfeit certificate the plaintiff can testify only to the identity of the certificate and of whom Tie received it.
    The value set at the time of passing it.
    ActioN upon the statute for uttering and passing to the plaintiff: a final settlement note, in August A. D. 1789, which had the signature of John Pierce commissioner, as and for a good certificate; and the plaintiff says that said certificate is false, forged, counterfeit and altered, and never was issued from under tbe authority of the United States, nor signed by John Pierce commissioner; and said false, forged and counterfeit certificate is in the words following, viz. (recites the certificate) which is contrary to the statute, etc. Demanding damages. To this declaration a demurrer was given.
    The exception was — That it was not averred that said certificate was false and forged, at the time when it was uttered and put off to the plaintiff; but only that it was false, at the time of declaring.
    Judgment — Declaration sufficient. The plaintiff is describing the certificate, which was passed to him, and says it is a false; forged, etc. and then says it was never issued under the authority of the United States, nor signed by John Pierce, etc.
   The plaintiff was examined upon oath according to the statute, touching the defendants passing said certificate to him, and confined to that only, in his testimony. And the court assessed the damages according to the value of the certificate at the time it was passed to the plaintiff, which was six shillings on the pound.  