-
*32 The opinion of the Court was delivered byMr. Justice Cheves. The evidence to contradict or vary the legal efFedt of the endorsement, 1 think, was not legally admissible: but that is not made a question in this case. The evidence went to the Jury, and was fairly submitted to them. They were the proper judges of it, and the Court sees no reason to believe they drew a wrong conclusion. The motion is, therefore, refused.
Grimké, Colcock, Gantt, and Johnson, J. concurred. Mott, J. dissented.
Document Info
Judges: Cheves, Colcock, Gantt, Grimké, Johnson, Mott
Filed Date: 5/15/1818
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024