¶1Mr. Jones, for the defendant, moved to reconsider the order for *314ruling him to bail. The words of the affidavit are the same as those required by the Act of 1729, and therefore withiri the rule of the Court. The Court were also moved to reconsider the case of Smith et al. v. Watson, [ante, 311,] which they did, and unanimously affirmed the former decision.
1 D.C. 313
Grayham v. Konkapot
District of Columbia District Court
Decided June 15, 1806
District of Columbia District Court · decided 1806-06-15
<p>Ail affidavit in tie form of that required by the Act of Maryland, of 1729, is sufficient to hold the defendant to bail.</p>
Decided 1806-06-15