482 MURDOCK'S CASE.

generally and particularly, and declared that neither Britain Mur-
dock nor Zachariah Johnson acted as his agents, nor with his

no evidence of the materials found, except the complainant's books, which were not
proved; and, upon the whole, the exception is disallowed.

The Chancellor proceeded to consider the defendant's exception; first, the au-
ditor states, and the Chancellor perceives, that there is no evidence of this claim
except the books of the complainant, which have been rejected as not being proved
The Chancellor perceives, indeed, that the credit by Edward Norwood to Samuel
Norwood for £94 10s. 0d., is opposed to a charge against Samuel Norwood of a
balance of £168 Os. 4d. The exception is disallowed. Second, it was right for
the auditor to take the average of the ferriages; what else could he do? Would a
jury in fixing damages require proof of each receipt ? No! The exception is dis-
allowed. Third, there is no proof of any agreement or understanding between the
parties, that the defendant was to be allowed for managing. Besides, it seems that
the complainant managed likewise. Upon the whole, the claim seems improper,
and the exception is accordingly disallowed. Fourth, account C. No. 5, it seems
is an account of debits only, taken from the account settled by the arbitrators, and
entered in Edward Norwood's books. The auditor rightly conceived it proper,
that those books, which, for want of probates were not allowed as evidence for him,
should not be taken against him. They were entirely laid aside, as was also the award.
Fifth, this exception is indefinite and uncertain. It specifies nothing. It does not
appear that the auditor has rejected any legal satisfactory proof. The exception
is therefore disallowed. Sixth, it does not appear to the Chancellor that any item
or article due to the defendant, is established and proved against the complainant by
any of the persons or exhibits mentioned in this exception; and it is therefore
disallowed.

It is, thereupon Ordered, That the auditor correct his account between the com-
plainant and defendant, or state a new account between them, agreeably to the opi-
nions of the Chancellor and principles herein contained; and that having so done,
he return the said account to this court, and that thereon the Chancellor will pro-
ceed to a final decree; that is to say, the account to be returned by the auditor shall
not be liable to any exceptions; provided it be stated agreeably to the Chancellor's
opinions aforesaid, and his decisions herein contained on the exceptions aforesaid of
the complainant, and of the defendant. To admit new exceptions after what has
passed, or to allow a correction or amendment of those exceptions on which the
Chancellor has decided, would be unreasonable.

In obedience to this order the auditor, on the 22d of May, 1800, reported, that he
had re-stated an account between the complainant and defendant, as directed, and
there was due to the complainant £776 15s. 6d.t including interest to the 31st day
of January, 1800.

9th June, 1800.—HANSON, Chancellor.—The auditor of this court having stated and
returned an account, agreeably to the opinions of the Chancellor, and the principles
expressed in the order or written declaration, containing the Chancellor's decision
on the exceptions of each party to the preceding report:

It is thereupon Decreed, that the last stated account and report of the auditor be
confirmed; that the defendant pay unto the complainant the sum of £776 15s. 6d.,
which is stated by the auditor to be due on the 31st day of January last, from the
said defendant to the said complainant; and the said sum shall bear interest from
the said day until the time of payment or levying thereof; and the said interest shall