GENERAL OBSERVATIONS. 26? 



14. for using a gun. After stating the information, 

 which negatived specifically every one of the quali- 

 fications in 22 and 23 Car. 2. c. 25. and which dis- 

 closed the fact of the defendant's having used a gun 

 and pointers, and killed a partridge; it stated a sum- 

 mons, and the appearance of the defendant; who 

 " having heard the same, and the aforesaid deposi- 

 tion of the said E. Tye having been read over again 

 to the said E. Tye, in the presence and hearing of 

 the said T. S. Crowther, and the said E. Tye having 

 again affirmed his said deposition to be true in the 

 presence and hearing of the said T. S. Crowther, he, 

 the said T. S. Crowther, is asked by me, the said 

 justice, If he can say any thing for himself, why he, 

 the said T. S. Crowther, should not be convicted of 

 the premises above charged upon him in the form 

 aforesaid : Whereupon," &c.* It was moved to quash 

 tliis conviction on two grounds : 1st. That the evi- 

 dence on which it was founded was not given in the 

 presence of the defendant; for on his appearing be- 

 fore the justice, the witness only affirmed his former 

 disposition to be true ; and R. v. Vipont, 2 Burr. 

 1 163, was cited. 2dly. The qualifications required 

 by 22 and 23 Car. 2. c. 25. were not negatived by 

 the evidence. The evidence was only general, that 

 what he did was* against the form of the statute, &c. 

 and R. v. Jarvis, 1 Burr. 154; and R. v. Wheatman, 

 Doug. 532, were cited. In answer it was said, That 

 the deposition of the witness having been read over 

 in the presence of the defendant, and affirmed by 



N 2 



