¶1The court however thought the witness inadmissible; and the following was tfie entry made on the order -book, 1 ‘The court having maturely considered the transcript of the record, *and the arguments of the counsel on both sides, are of opinion, that the said decree is erroneous, in this, that the said court permitted Wedford a witness to give testimony of the contents of a permit, not proved to have been lost. Therefore it is considered, by the court, that the same be reversed and annulled, and that the appel-lees pay, unto the appellants, their costs by them expended in prosecuting their appeal aforesaid here. And it is further ordered, that the jurors’ verdict, in this cause, be set aside; and the cause sent back, to the said court of admiralty, for a new trial to be had therein.”
4 Va. 127
Dawson v. Graves
Decided May 15, 1788
Court of Appeals of Virginia · decided 1788-05-15
William Graves and John Hague, as well on behalf of themselves as of the commonwealth, filed a libel, in the court of admiralty, against the ship Cyrus, James Dawson master, for a breach of the then revenue laws of the state, charging that the ship, on the 22d of June, 1786, imported salt and other articles, from Philadelphia, into the port of Norfolk, without reporting the same truly to the collector; but made a false entry thereof, bj' concealing 1000 bushels of salt, some…
Decided 1788-05-15