COMMON PLEAS, Philadelphia
County:
HOLMES verʃus COMEGYS.
T
HIS was a Scire Facias againft the Garnifhee in a Foreign Attachment, upon the trial of which the confidential agent or factor, of the original Defendants who was cafually attending in Court, was offered as a witnefs to prove effects in the hands of the Garnifhee.Levy, objected to the admiffion of the witnefs ; and contended, that he ought not to be allowed, or, at leaft compelled, to give evidence of matters confidentially communicated to him as an agent ; and that the Court had then no power over him as a witnefs, becaufe he had not been ʃubpœna'd to attend.
But by SHIPPEN, Preʃident:– It would be of very dangerous confequence, if it was eftablifhed, that a commercial agent was not amendable as a witnefs in a Court of Juftice, in a caufe againft his conftituent. It is ftraining the matter of privilege too far: and the law makes him a witnefs, we are too fond of getting at the truth, to permit him to excufe himfelf from declaring it, becaufe he conceives, that, in point of delicacy, it would be a breach of confcience .
by the court :–Let the witnefs be affirmed.