From Mecklenburg.

, Debt upon the single bond of the Defendant, executed to the Plaintiff, dated December 17, 1819.

The only question was, whether the statute of limitations which was pleaded, was a bar. On this issue it was proved, that on the 6th of March, 1812, the Plaintiff had, by endorsement, assigned the bond to one Douglas,'who, on the 20th July, 1826, commenced suit against the Defendant. To this suit the statute of limitation being pleaded, a nonsuit was entered, the endorsement stricken out, and the present suit commenced.

His Honor Judge M AN gum instructed the Jury, that the statute of limitations did not bar the action, and a verdict being returned for the Plaintiff, the Defendant appealed.

submitted the case without argument.

contended that the statute of limitation cannot possibly bar his right of recovery in the present action. The present is an action of debt, in the name of the obligee, against the obligors, upon a bond, it is admitted, that the Legislature, in the year 1826, passed an act fixing the statute upon instruments under seal, at ten years. But that act does not affect the present case. Here then, is an action of debt upon a bond&emdash;in which action, upon such an instrument, there is no statute of limitation whatever, which can affect the present case. Consequently, the Plaintiff is entitled t» recover.

But to meet every part of the case, which may be relied on by the Defendant, it will be considered as an ac-Hon of debt, in the name of the assignee, against the ol> .■ ligor. In that case, it is contended, that the Plaintiff would be equally entitled to recover, as in (he present action. The first act of Assembly which would have a bearing upon the question then, is ¡he act of 1715 This act limits the time of bringing different kinds of actions. In the enumeration of them, the action of debt for arrearages of rent is mentioned, and oniy for that special purpose. By this statute the bar is three years.

The next act, which has a bearing upon the question, is the act of 1762. This act was passed to make promissory notes negotiable, as inland bills of exchange were by the custom of merchants in England ; and further, directing such an action to recover the same, as upon a bill of exchange, to which it is assimilated — there being at that time no method pointed out by any act of Assembly for recovering the money due upon them. The nest act of Assembly is the act of 1786.

…

Citation profile

How this case has been treated — in progress