Smith v. Croom

Smith v. Croom

Lower Court

  • Leon County


  • 1839


  • 452


  • 805


Bishop says he ??? knew ??? Bishop ??? near the wheel house. Next he says he did not see the daughter. So ??? is contradicted by the witnesses of the complainants. How is it possible to decide an important right on such evidence. No Jury would find a verdict upon it. So this Court to disregard the palpable contradiction & to do what no lawyer could prevail twelve knew not lawyers to do. In view of the conflict of testimony I humbly submit that the purpose cause to pursue if as the Court was disputed to differ with the Circuit Jude. Is to send the question of sensorship [?] to be tried by a Jury of the County to where neither [?] of fact should be submitted and by when they can be better determined when the witnesses who testify disagree in their statements. If this ?? a case at law unveiling the truth to a ???? or a ?????? my client would have a jury of