Ex parte Putnam

DARGAN, C.'J.'

An attachment was sued out at the instance of William H. Gulleland and others against James M. Putnam, which was levied on certain goods as the property of the defendant. At the return term of the writ, the defendant moved to quash it on two grounds: first, that the affidavit was insufficient; and, secondly, that it was not directed to any officer. The plaintiffs also moved to amend the attachment, by adding the proper direction. These motions were heard at the same time, and the court granted the motion to amend, and refused the motion to quash. A motion is now made for a…