
    Geoffry Palmer v. M. B. Bogan.
    The foreman of the jury in a slander ease, who had used like words of the plaintiff to those on which the action was brought, was excused, against the defendant’s consent, from sitting on the trial; and the defendant was not permitted, for that reason, to continue the cause.
    Before O’Neall, J., at Union, Fall Term, 1839.
    This was an action of slander, in which the parties had expressed their readiness to go to trial, when the foreman, at the suggestion of the plaintiff’s counsel, asked leave to retire from the jury, alleging that he had himself made a charge against the plaintiff similar to that which was the cause of the present action. The presiding Judge granted the leave, notwithstanding the vehement protestation of the defendant’s counsel, The defendant then desired to continue the cause; but no motion was made to that effect, as the Court signified that it would not be allowed without the usual affidavits.
    
      See further report of this case, 2 McM. 122. An\
    
    The verdict went for the plaintiff, and an appeal was taken, among other grounds,
    Because the foreman had been excluded from the jury without the defendant’s consent.
    And because the defendant had not been allowed, on this account to continue. e
   Gima,per■ O’Neall, J.,

said, “we are satisfied that the judge below exercised a proper discretion in excusing the foreman of the jury, and in ordering the case on to trial.”  