The justice erred in rejecting M’Murtry as a witness. He had no interest in the event of the cause. Its determination in favour of the plaintiff or defendant, could in no way affect him. It was competent, in a suit of this nature, for the defendant to prove that the property in the logs was not in the plaintiff, and if this was what he intended to prove by M’Murtry, he was a proper and competent witness for that purpose.

Judgment reversed-