2 Mass. 106 | Mass. | 1806
It is now settled that nothing short of a conviction on an indictment for crimen falsi, and a judgment on the conviction, or a direct interest in the event of a cause, is a sufficient objection to the competency of a witness. Where the witness is in every event liable, and his testimony is to determine to wffiich of the par-lies he shall be liable, he is a competent witness.
As between these parties, Smith was Cushman’s agent to receive from W. the money due on the note.
Judgment according to verdict.
Emerson & Al. vs. The Providence Hat Manufacturing Company, 12 Mass Rep. 237.
The general rule, which admits the testimony of agents, applies only to agente employed in the ordinary transactions of commerce, but not to those who are agente in a single transaction merely.—Edmunds vs. Lowe, 8 B. & Cr. 408.