King v. Pearce

The matter stated in the affidavit for a continuance, taken in connection with what transpired at the previous term, is not sufficient to warrant this court in interfering with the *223ruling of the Common Pleas, overruling the defendant’s application. At the previous term, the motion for a continuance was on the ground that the plaintiff and Capt. Artus were indispensable witnesses; At the term when the cause was tried, no efforts had been made to procure the testimony of these two witnesses, nor was it suggested that they were at all material; but the continuance then prayed for was on account…