MORGAN J. THOMAS v. ABNER ALEXANDER, 2 Dev. & Bat. 385

Gaston, Judge. The instructions of the judge, which were excepted to as erroneous, are set forth in the transcript, but it contains no statement of the evidence in reference to which the instructions were given. We might therefore, with propriety affirm the judgment, without examining the instructions, since it is the settled rule of this Court, (whatever inadvertencies to the contrary may have crept into some of its early decisions, when the precise limits of its jurisdiction were not ascertained,) to reverse no judgment because it is not shown to be right, but only when it is seen to have been wrong. Doe dem.

Pickett v. Pickett, 1 Dev. 6. Whether a judgment be rendered erroneous because of a mistake of law in the charge of the judge, it js impossible to see, unless the bearing of that charge upon the facts testified, and the influence which it may have had on the verdict, shall be made to appear. But we have examined the instructions, and are of opinion lhat they are unobjectionable in. point of law, and in conformity to the principles heretofore laid down in the " i i case of Dark v. Marsh, 2 Car. Law Repos. 249. The case of Dark v. Marsh, 2 Car. Law Repost. 249, approved. The Judgment below affirmed with costs.

Per Cum am. Judgment affirmed.