|John Holmes &
|John Holmes and Solomon
And the said John Holmes And Solomon Ketcham by Wm. Willcocks their Attorney come and say that the Judg, Entered proceeding said before by Justice Anderson on the New Trial had in the above cause ought to be reversed for the following reasons.
Because there was not any evidence given to prove that offered in the trial which proved that the goods wares and Merchandize seized so seized & condemned came from within the Enemy's Lines.
Because there was no proof that the said goods &c were brought by the said John Holmes & Solomon Ketcham or either of them from within the Enemys Lines.
Because a certain Andrew Bowne in the Proceedings mention Because for want of such Proof the said Attorney among other things a Witness for the Plaintiff Elisha Walton among other things offered to prove that Mrs. Holmes informed Because a certain Phoebe Ketcham him that the Waggon and goods (in controversy) were going to the house of Daniel Ketcham, Whereupon the Attorney for the Defendants Holmes & Ketcham did object saying it was hearsay testimony and ought not to be admitted but the said objection was overruled by he Court--Upon Which a Bill of Exceptions was prayed &granted &c.
Because the Plaintiff offered to give in evidence by a certain John James what Daniel Ketcham in conversation with John Holmes should have said. The said Daniel being then in Court & subpoenaed by the said Plaintiff. Whereupon objection was made by the Attorney for the Defendants. But the same was overruled & a Bill prayed & granted &c.
Because a certain Phoebe Ketcham was offered as a witness by the Plaintiff. The said Phoebe Ketcham being in the Waggon at the time of Seizure & having road all the w been in it all the way from Mrs. Holme's to the place of Seizure. Whereupon objection was made by the said Attorney for the Defendants alleging that the said Phoebe ought as a party in the transaction ought to have been joined in the suit & was an interested Witness. But the objection was overruled by the Court & a Bill prayed & granted.
Because (this trial (which was called & intended for a new trial) was had between Elisha Walton Plaintiff & John Holmes And Solomon Ketcham Defendants. Whereas in truth & in fact there never had before been a trial between these Parties & so the said Attorney for the Defendants say there could not this could not be This trial could not be warranted by the order & Judgt of the Sup. Court for a New Trial.
Because there was not any Law of this State authorizing a New Trial in this cause. Which objection was made but overruled by the Court.
Because in the four last Reasons the said Defendants by their Atty aforesaid did move & require that the said Elisha Walton might be Nonsuited. & the said Defendants discharged. But the Court overruled the same suffering the Jury to give a Verdict Whereupon a Bill was prayed & granted &c.
Because Judgment was entered in the said Cause for the said Elisha when according to Justice & the Laws of the Land Judgt ought to have been entered in favor of the said John Holmes & Sol. Ketcham. Wherefore the said John & Sol: pray that the Judgt of the may be reversed & the said John & Solomon restored in all things &c.