Watson v. Torrence
Watson v. Torrence
Opinion of the Court
Territory of Michigan DISTRICT OF HURON & DETROIT
Pleas at Detroit before James Abbott & Jacob Visger associate judges of the court of the district of Huron & Detroit, of the term of august one thousand eight hundred eight
John Watson vs William B. Torrence
Sur appeal from the judgrn1 of Justice McDougall
On the Second day of may one thousand eight hundred eight the record of the Justice of peace, George McDougall, were filed, and are in the following words—to wit—
John Watson vs William B. Torrence
In case damages twenty dollars.
This action is brought against the defendant for failing to perform his undertaking, or assumpsit, to pay the plaintiff twenty dollars for furnishing a Substitute for defendant who was regularly drafted into the Service of the United States.
26 Subpoena on the part of the defendant for Samuel Graham & David Cooper.
feby 4 Subpoena on the part of the plaintiff for Robert Smart and Major John Whipple
The parties appeared on this day—Defendant pleads that he did not promise and undertake in manner & form as the Said John hath above complained against him.
Rob1 Smartt—William Watson—David Cooper and Major John Whipple were Sworn—Samuel Graham affirmed.
In this case the parties having been heard by their evidence, and all & Singular the premisses being Seen, and by the court fully understood, it is considered by the court that the plaintiff recover against the defendant the Sum of twenty dollars damages, and also two dollars & fifty cents for his costs and charges by him laid out & expended in this behalf; whereupon the defendant prays an appeal to the district court, which is granted to him on his complying with the requisite of the law.
1808 - feby 5. James Henry filed his and the defendant’s bond to prosecute the appeal agreable to law.
I certify the above and foregoing to be a true transcript from my docket. Geo: McDougall J.P.D.D.
To Peter Audrain Esqr Clerk of the Court of the district of Huron & Detroit
In the district court of Huron & Detroit continued & held at Detroit, the plaintiff was ruled to declare; and on the eighteenth day of july the plaintiff filed his declaration in the following words—to wit—
Territory of Michigan in the district court of the territory of THE TERM OF MAY IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD 1808-
District of Huron & Detroit ss—
William B. Torrence was attached to answer unto Captain John Watson in a plea of the case for this, towit, that whereas the Said William B. Torrence heretofore towit, on the eighteenth day of January in the year of our Lord 1808, towit, at Detroit in the District and Territory aforesaid was drafted from the Militia of this Territory in obedience to an order from the President of the United States to Serve a tour of three months duty in the Service of the United States in the Said Captain John Watson’s Company of infantry, and having been therein duly and regularly inrolled and mustered, and being desirous of being freed and exonerated from the Said Service before the expiration of the Said term of three months, did on the eighteenth day of January in the year of our Lord 1808, towit, at Detroit aforesaid, propose &
E Brush AtN
To the above declaration the defendant by Sol. Sibley pleads the general issue non assumpsit. And thereupon issue is joined betwen the parties. Therefore let a jury come who to the Said William and the Said John, are in no wise related, because as well the Said William as the Said John put themselves upon that Jury.
And on the Nineteenth day of august one thousand eight hundred eight the parties come into court by their attornies, and thereupon come a jury for that purpose empannelled and returned by the Marshall, who were elected, tried, and Sworn the truth to Speak upon the issue joined, to wit, James Mitchell, Senior,—Conrad Seek—Robert Kaine—Jacob Smith— Louis Bouree—John Burnett—Abraham Cook—Louis Peltier—Jacob Tuckar—Maurice Moran—Elijah Harrington— and Christopher Hart-sough; who after having heard the evidence & arguments retired from the bar to consult of their verdict, afterwards returned into Court, and upon their oath do Say that they find for the plaintiff to recover of the defendant twenty dollars in damages. Signed John Burnet—foreman.
Whereupon the defendant’s attorney gave notice that he will find his reasons in arrest of verdict and the Court granted Judgment Nisi.
On the twenty Second day of august one thousand eight hundred eight, Solomon Sibley, attorney for the defendant, comes into court and filed the following reasons in arrest of verdict, to wit—
HURON & DETROIT DISTRICT COURT FOR AUGUST TERM 1808.
John Watson vs William B. Torrence
In case on appeal
Be it Known that the Said William Comes into Court on this aad day of august 1808, and files these his reasons for and in arrest of Verdict given in the above case, towit—
Ist Because the plaintiff hath alledged & averred in his declaration that the said William B. Torrence was on the 18th day of January 1808 at Detroit in the territory of Michigan drafted from the militia of the Said territory in obedience to an order from the President of the United States to Serve a tour of duty for three months in the Service of the United States in the infantry Company of Capt John Watson, and that the Said William was duly & regularly inrolled, and mustered in Said Company; all which facts & averments So Set forth by the Said John are material facts and Substance, and ought to have been proved before the court and jury in Support of Said action and issue, which was not done, nor any evidence introduced by Said
2dly—Because the Said John Sets forth in his declaration the consideration upon which the promise of the Said William was made, which consideration So Set forth by the Said John is wholly insuficient in law for the Said John to have and Support his action of assumpsit thereon against the Said William the Same by the Shewing of the Said John being illegal and contrary to the Sound policy of the laws in Such case made & provided, the Said William prays that the verdict given may be Set aside & arrested &c
3d—Because it was not proven before the Jury that the Said John did procure & furnish a legal Substitute to Serve in the place & stead of the Said William in the detachment of Said militia, as alledged by Said John, but Said fact was negatived by the evidence.
4thly Because it was proven that the Said John, after making the promise, as Set forth did revoke & rescind Such promise So made on his part, and thereof did notify the Said William
5thly Because it was not proved that the Said William was ever regularly in-rolled, or mustered in the company of Cap1 John Watson, or that there was at that time or at any other time any Such company in the Service of the Said United States in the territory of Michigan all which ought to have been proven before the court & jury to enable Said John to recover of the Said William.
And lastly—Because Said verdict is against law, and the Sound policy of the law.
Wherefore the Said William for the reasons & causes aforesaid and others appearing prays that the Said verdict by the Jury given in this cause may be arrested, Set aside, and held for nought &c— Sol° Sibley atty August n 1808 for William B Torrence
On the twenty fourth day of august one thousand eight hundred eight— The reasons filed in arrest of Verdict were examined by the court, and considered insufficient; to which opinion of the court the defendant by his attorney excepted, and prayed Such exceptions be recorded; which exceptions were Signed by the Court, and were in the following words, to wit—
Watson v Torrence— The evidence and facts of the case as appeared before the court of the District on trial of this action—
That the Said Torrence was drafted out of the Militia to Serve a tour of duty in the detachment of Militia the last winter, called into actual service Said-to be under the order of the President of the United States. The Said Torrence upon being So drafted applied to Major John Whipple commandant of Said Corps, and offered a young man by the name of Hugh McMahan, as a Substitute to Serve for him Said Torrence the Said tour of duty for
26th august 1808— Jacob Visger
Peter Audrain elk
Judgment
It is considered by the Court that the Said John recover of the Said William twenty dollars for his damages, with Costs of Suit. From which Said judgment the defendant, by Solomon Sibley, his attorney, prays appeal to the Supreme Court, and to him it is allowed on his complying with the law.
I Peter Audrain, clerk of the court of the district of Huron & Detroit, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true copy from the files in my office. In testimony whereof I have hereunto Set my hand and affixed the Seal of the Said district court, at Detroit the 6th day of September 1808. Peter Audrain clerk.
I certify that a bond is filed with Security for the prosecution of this appeal.
Peter Audrain Clk
\?Note: The original statement of evidence from which this transcript was made reads: “It was proved that the boy was rising of 18 years old at the time the agreement was entered into, but was small.”]
[In the handwriting of Peter Audrain]
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.