¶1The Legislature have thought proper to attempt the suppression of the practice of issuing due bills, as one extremely mischievous to the community; and one method they have adopted is, to make the person liable to an action, who issues a due bill for a less sum than ten shillings. It would materially weaken the effect *202of fliis law, and disarm it of its sting, if when such sepa-* rate acti°ns are brought, the Court should interpose a eon4 solidation rule. Such interference would be peculiarly improper in the present tase, in which the Plaintiff, by warranting and blending four dollars in each warrant, ha¿ pursued d touch less rigorous course, than he was allowed by law tó do.—This consideration, togethér with the stay of execution'which the «Defendant might have availed himself of, bad a larger sum been claimed in one warrant, induct us to concur in the opinion given by the judge Who heard the motion. His judgment on the motion is therefore affirmed.
1 N.C. 200
Smith v. Bowell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided July 15, 1817
Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1817-07-15
<p>Where the yia.ntiffsued out sixteen warrants a- | gainst tlieDe-f'endant upon due bills, the highest ofthe warrants including only four dollars, tb e Court on motion refused to consolidate the warrants.</p>
Decided 1817-07-15