¶1said it was not sufficient. It was neither a positive affidavit that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in a certain sum ; nor was it such an affidavit as made the account evidence per se, under the Act of Assembly of Maryland, 1729, c. 20, ■§> 9, according to the rule in the case of Smith et al. v. Watson, at June term, 1806, in Washington, [1 Crunch, C. C. 311.]
2 D.C. 41
Travers v. Hight
Decided June 15, 1812
The account was headed “ George W. Hight to Esias Tra-vers, Dr., for articles furnished by his direction, and he to be answerable for the payment thereof.” Among other items was a charge for rations for the officers, &e., (George W. Hight being a recruiting officer.) An affidavit of the plaintiff was indorsed on the paper, “ that the within account is just and true as stated.”
Decided 1812-06-15