¶1were of opinion that it was first necessary to account, in some satisfactory way, for the absence of the party himself; and then proof might be received as to the materiality of the witness, as far as it could be made by a third person. That it would be extremely mischievous to continue *17causes, upon the naked ground of the party and his witness being absent; for he might absent himself and keep back his witness, for the very purpose of delaying the trial; and thereby harass his adversary at pleasure.
1 N.C. 16
Crites v. Lanier
Superior Court of North Carolina
Decided March 15, 1799
Superior Court of North Carolina · decided 1799-03-15
A CONTINUANCE of the cause was moved for on behalf of the plaintiff, who was absent; but from what cause did not appear; his witness had been summoned, as appeared by the return of the subpoena, but was also absent.
Decided 1799-03-15