Martin v. . Hough , 9 N.C. 368 ( 1823 )

Hall, Judge.

I do not think it was a legal objection to Martin Picket’s competency as a witness, that he had become the security of James Martin, who had obtained letters of administration pendente Ute on the estate in dispute ; because, whether the will is established or not, Martin is liable and hound by it to somebody ; to the executors, if the will is established, 10 the administrators, if it is not.

With respect to the objection founded upon the opinion of fact, which it is alleged the Judge gave in the hearing of the Jury, respecting the sanity of the testator, it seems rather to have been an opinion of the manner in which the letter was read. Í think there is nothing in this objection 5 it is far-fetched ; it is not founded upon the spirit of the act which forbids Judges to give opinions to Juries as to matters of fact. I think the rule for a new trial should be discharged.

The rest of the Court concurred.