Volume 17 — Tennessee Reports

Joel C. Rice executed a note to the defendant, Johnson, payable in the United States Bank, at Nashville; which note was endorsed by Johnson and Marr, and negotiated in bank for foe accommodation of Rice. The note was not paid at its maturity, and foe drawer and endorsers were protested. Notices were put in foe post office in Nashville, in due time, a(j(jresse(j to Marr and Johnson, and directed to Clarksville.

This action was commenced by summons before a justice of the peace, in Maury county, on the 22nd of October, 1833. The justice gave judgment against the defendant, and an appeal was taken to the circuit court. On the trial in that court, before the jury was sworn, the defendant moved to quash the warrant, because the Christian names of the firm of Grove and Jenkins did not appear. The court suffered the plaintiffs to amend the warrant.

This writ of error is prosecuted from a judgment rendered on motion, in Davidson circuit court, agáinst A. A. Kincan-non, as sheriff and collector for Lincoln' county, and the -other plaintiffs m error, as his securities. The bond recited, that Kincannon was elected sheriff -and collector of Lincoln -county.

The plaintiffs mo ved in this court for .a judgment against the defendants upon the following facts: they were jointly bound as the securities of Eli Talbot, clerk of the chancery court at Franklin. Judgment, at this term of the supreme court, has been rendered against the plaintiffs, for a liability incurred, as securities, and they ask the court for judgment against their co-securities, the defendants, for their contributive share thereof.

A judgment was rendered by a justice of the peace, in Giles county, in favor of the plaintiffs, against the defendant Royle, for the sum of ninety-four dollars and fifty-two cents. An execution on this judgment, properly certified hy the clerk of the county court of Giles, was sent by the justice to Lawrence county. This execution was credited with the sum of thirty-nine dollars and forty-eight cents.

This was an action brought by Eubanks, the defendant in error, against Smith and Nolen, the plaintiffs in error, upon a bond of indemnity, executed by them, to secure him from liability on an obligation he had made to one George Whyte, for one hundred and twenty nine dollars, payable in furniture, on which he, Eubanks, had been garnisheed by Nolen, and a judgment rendered against him, upon which his property was sold.

This is an action of debt brought by the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error, on a contract in writing, for the sum of sixty-two dollars and fifty-six cents, to he paid when a certain suit was determined, pending between said William Shelton and John M’Neil.

-This was an action commenced before .a justice of the peace in Wayne county, upon the following obligation: “On or before the first .day of October next, I promise to pay Seymour Plummer & Co. o.r order., the sum of forty-one dollars and ninety-two cents, which may be discharged in a good young horse beast, valued at cash price by two disinterested persons; or may be discharged in good cash notes, due the 26th day of December next, on good citizens of Wayne county, for…

On the 18th of December, 1827, Dixon, as surety of one Richardson, executed a note jointly with Richardson, to Marshall, for seventy-six dollars and twenty-five cents, payable on or before the 1st of January, 1829. On the 28th of October, 1834, defendants in error sued Dixon alone, before a justice of the peace of Smith county, to answer them in a plea of debt by note, for the sum of seventy-six dollars and twenty-five cents.

The plaintiff in error recovered a judgment against the defendant, Nelson, before a magistrate, for thirty-five dollars, upon which, the following capias ad satisfaciendum issued, and was executed on Nelson on the 3d July, 1834: “To any lawful officer to execute and return: you are hereby commanded to take the body of Robert Nelson, and him safely keep, till he render to you the sum of thirty-five dollars, to satisfy a judgment which Maxwell Sharp obtained before me for…

Ejectment from Wilson county. Upon the trial in the circuit court, the lessor of the plaintiff offered to read to the jury, a deed from Philip Shaclder to John Young, for six hundred and forty acres of land. The defendants objected to the deed, upon the ground that the probate was insufficient, hut the court overruled the objection, and permitted the deed to be read to the jury.

This was an action originally commenced before a justice jof tlie peace, for the hire of a negro, and founded upon a note, which was as follows: “On or before the 1st of January, 1835, we, or either of us, promise to pay John Thompson, guardian of Margaret and Sarah Buchanan, fifty dollars, for the hire of Daniel, until the 25th of December, 1834, and to furnish said negro with three suits of clothes, one pair of shoes, blanket and hat; as witness our hands and seals, this…

This was an action of debt, by the defendants in Crrdi', against the plaintiff in error, in which the following facts were agreed: “Thomas-Hickman and Robert Searcy, in his lifetime, sold six hundred and nine acres of land to William Outlaw, for eighteen hundred dollars, and made a deed with a joint warrantry of title, under date of 26th of February, 1805.

Deberry sued out a scire facias against Henry H. Marable and William Adams, which set forth a judgment obtained by him against Marable and Adams, for two hundred dollars debt, and twenty-three dollars damages, for detention of that debt, and costs, &c. and that no executiQjrfed issued thereon within a year and a day, after its r,ei|||lpBPand an execution was prayed, &c. In bar of which, Adams pleaded that he was security of Marable on the pote or instrument upon which said…

The facts necessary to be stated in order to understand this case are correctly set forth in the opinion of the- court, delivered by Judge Green. The cause was argued by

Lewis Earthman, James Marshall and Zenas Tate, on the 19th day of November, 1819, made and executed their certain note or writing obligatory, sealed with their seals, to the Nashville Bank, for the sum of two hundred and eighty four dollars and sixty two and a half cents, due three years after date, bearing interest from the date.

This is an action of detinue brought for three negroes, by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. Lillard, as deputy sheriff of Rutherford county, levied, an execution in favor of Thos. Rucker against Jonathan Rucker, the father of the plaintiffs below, on the negroes in question, as Jonathan Rucker’s property.

This is an' action on the case brought to recover damages for a breach of warranty', as to the soundness of a horse sold by the plaintiff in error, to the defendant. The facts of the case, as shown, by the bill of exceptions, are, that M’Gre-gor had purchased the horse the day before he sold him to Penn; that he informed him, that he had purchased him as a horse with-One good eye, and that he recommended him as having one good eye.

On the 27th of July, 1828, Hopkins sold to - Cox a tract of land in Warren county, for two thousand three hundred and twenty-eight dollars, and executed to him a deed, with a covenant of general warranty. The covenant was to and with Cox, without naming bis heirs or assignees. On the same day Cox sold the same land to Lane, for seventeen hundred dollars, and conveyed ‘it with a covenant of general warranty.

Ejectment from Wilson county. In 1827, Joseph B. Chance obtained from the State a grant for the lands in dispute, which in that year he sold to Wyatt H. Scott, and executed to him a bond for the title. At this time the land was wood land and supposed vacant.

At the February term, 1835, of the circuit court of Giles county, Chloe Sanders and Samuel I). Read, executors, &c. recovered a judgment against Thomas C. Porter, then sheriff of Giles county and the plaintiffs in error as his sureties, for the sum of seven hundred and twenty-six dollars. This judgment was obtained upon motion, without notice to the sureties, for moneys collected by Porter as sheriff.

In tlie year 1829, Wm. Phillips, one of the defendants in error, sold to William Wickham a tract of land in Montgomery county, and executed his bond for title thereto.

The defendant in error, as sheriff of Lincoln county, had in bis bands a fi. fa. in favor of John F. Morgan, against James S. and W. Holman, which he levied on a negro woman and two children, as the property of William W. Holman.

This is an action of debt, founded upon a bond executed by Eli Talbot and bis securities for the faithful performance of bis duties as clerk and master of the chancery court at Franklin.

The county court of Montgomery, at its October term, 1S32, appointed Robert Kenney a constable for said county of Montgomery. Whereupon he executed the usual bond, conditioned to faithfully execute and perform the duties of his office, in which bond the plaintiffs in error became his sureties. The defendant in error placed in the hands of said Ken-ney, as was alledged by him, notes and claims for collection which were collected and not paid.

Mary Ann Moore, of the city of Philadelphia, claiming to be sister and sole surviving heir at law of Thomas Wilson, who died several years since in' the county of Wilson, in this State, intestate, and as then supposed without heirs, brought an ejectment against the trustees of Campbell academy, who had possessed themselves of the estate of Thomas Wilson, as having escheated and by operation of law, vested in them.

This bill was filed by the State of Tennessee against the Union Bank of the State, to recover the bonus agreed by the eleventh section of the charter to be paid by the bank, and also the dividends which have accrued upon the stock owned by the State in that institution.

This bill is filed by complainant Hickman, to redeem a negro named George, which he alleges he mortgaged to the defendant Cantrell.

The plaintiff in error was indicted at the May term, 1832, of the circuit court of Davidson county, for dealing faro. The cause was tried at the May term, 1834, of said oourt, at which term the jury returned a verdict of guilty. A new trial w-as moved for and refused, and a writ of error prosecuted to this court.

The record in this case shows that on the 24th of November, 1835, the grand jury returned into court a bill of indictment, charging the defendant with stealing a five dollar bank note, the property of John B. Hall, and Andrew J. Black-more, traders and merchants, trading under the name and style of Hall, Blackmore, & Co. upon the back of which was indorsed “a true bill,” and signed by the foreman.

At the November term, 1834, of the Davidson circuit court, Joseph A. Mabry, the plaintiff in error, was arraigned and Died on a bill of indictment, charging him under our penal code with having unlawfully, feloniously, wilfully and malicously shot one John R. Nelson. The jury returned as their verdict, that he was not guilty of felony, as charged, but that he was guilty of an assault and battery upon .the body of the said John R. Nelson.

This bill was filed against the defendant, Faris, by John Polk and Agnes his wife, formerly Agnes Brown-, Robert Harper and Elizabeth S. his wife, formerly Elizabeth S. Polk, William F. Smith and Mary T. his wife, formerly Mary T. Polk, Thomas A. Polk, Alexander F. Polk, George Polk, Catharine Polk, James Polk and William Polk; the four latter are minors, who sue by their next friend, John Polk.

This is a bill filed under the Act of 1832, c. 11, § 4, to subject property in this State to the payment of a debt due from Scott and Truet, two of the defendants, to the ci m-plainants, and charges, that in 1829, Scott and Truet, who are both non-residents of the State of Tennessee, bought goods of the complainants, at that time and yet citizens of New Orleans, State of Louisiana, to the amount of $1232 92, for which they drew a bill of exchange on the house of John G.…

The defendant in error was sued as endorser of a bill single, made payable at the office of discount and deposite of the Bank of the United States at Nashville. At maturity it was protested for non-payment, by the notary public at Nash-! yille, and a notice to the defendant was duly put into the paail in proper time, directed to him at the town of Jackson, in the county of Madison.

This Is an action of ejectment brought to recover the possession of a tract of land of 5000 acres, situated in the county of Dyer.

This was an action of trover for the conversion of a horse. It appears from the bills of exceptions, that Cowan, the plaintiff below, proved that he purchased the property, the subject of the controversy, at a public auction; and also a levy and sale of the property by defendant, under an execution against his bailee.

In this case, a motion was made in the circuit court-of Perry county, against the plaintiff in error , as sheriff of Stewart county, by the defendant in error, for failing to return a capias ¿id respondendum, to recover the penalty given by the act of 1777 c. 8, § 7.

This is an action of debt founded upon the following writing obligatory: On or before the 23rd day of December next, I promise to pay Peyton Wood- or order, three hundred and nineteen dollars. For value received, this 16th day of December, 1833. SILAS C. GOODRICH, [seal.]. The action was commenced in April, 1834.

This is an appeal from a proceeding in the county court of Madison, directing the opening a road in said county. The record shows an order of the court appointing five persons to view and report as to the expediency of opening the road in question. The report of the persons so appointed, was made-in favor of opening the road, and an overseer was appointed and an order establishing the road was made.

This is an action of covenant founded on a writing under-seal, executed by Richard C. Williams and Allen Williams, whereby they promised, on or before the 25th of December next, after its date, to pay to Caleb Brasfield or order, thirteen hundred dollars in cash notes, on good and solvent men,' in Weakley county, to be endorsed by Caleb Williams. The jury found a verdict for thirteen hundred dollars, and interest thereon, from the time the obligation became due.

This was a scire facias against the defendant, as special hail of John Swayne. Several pleas were filed, and amongst others, the plea of nul tiel record. In the argument of the case, several points were raised which it is not necessary to notice, as the opinion of the court is founded on one only, to wit. whether there was a variance between the condition of the bond as stated in the scire facias, and that offered in evidence, under the plea of nul tiel record.

This is an action of covenant founded upon an instrument under seal, in the following words, “$110, On the 17th day of December next, we or either of us promise to pay J. Graham, administrator of Geo.

<p>A memorándum or endorsement without date, made on the back of a protest by the notary thus, “notices of the within protest put in the post office at Jackson, addressed to John Ray and James 31. McMeans, Paris, Henry county, Tennessee. W. W. Perkins Notary Public,” is inaclmissable as evidence to prove the fact of notice.</p>

The defendant was indicted for the murder of his wife, in the circuit court of Carroll county. He was convicted and sentenced to be hung. He moved for a new trial, which being overruled, he appealed in error to this court. The facts necessary to he stated are found in the opinion deliver ed-by Judge Turley.

This is a bill brought by the complainant for the specific execution of a contract for the sale of a tract of land.

This was an original bill, filed by the complainant Cocke, against the heirs and representatives of George Evans and John Jack, deed.

Joseph R. Henderson, executor of the last will and testament of Andrew Henderson deed., heretofore brought an action of Ejectment to recover the land, the subject of this suit, then, and now in the possession of Nicholas S. Peck, one of the defendants, and that cause coming to this court, it was determined, that the testator not having devised the land to the executor in trust to sell, but only having given to him a naked power to sell, the descent was not broken, and…

<p>Where twelve, ór a majority of magistrates aré required by iaw to make a particular order or decree, it is not necessary that the particular order, entry or decree Should have incorporated in it a statement to that effect. It is sufficient if the record shows that on the day the order or entry was made, the requisite number of justices were present;</p> <p>Where the Vecor’d shows that the court was opened and held by a competent number of magistrates; those who allege the absence of a portion of them, or the presence of a smaller number when any particular act was done on the same day; must show affirmatively by the record that such was the fact.</p> <p>'Querc — Upon a petition by the owner of slaves, where the record dries not show that twelve or a majority acted; how far the decree of emancipation is void, or vriidable by the owner.</p>

<p>The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the court; a repitition of them is deemed unnecessary.</p>

This was an action of trespass, quart clausum fregit. The defendant below, resisted a recovery upon the ground that the plaintiff had neither the actual or constructive possession of the land or premises trespassed upon, the same being holden adversely to his right, and that if he had any right at all, it was barely a right of-entry or right of possession.

This is an action of detinue to recover from the defendant several negro slaves, brought by William Smith and Miller Smith, executors of the will and testament of John Smith deceased-, for the use of Absalom K. Simington, W. Alexander and James Campbell.

This is an action of ejectment, in which the defence mainly relied upon, is the act of limitations. Held: except for so much as is actually occupied by enclosure, definite, positive and notorious.” The jury found a verdict for the defendant, for the land actually occupied and enclosed, in his possession. A motion for a new trial was made, and overruled by the .court.

This was a proceeding, by Black and Wife against the plaintiffs in error. The cause was tried before three justices of the peace and a jury, in Roane county, on the 9th and 10t]i days of July 1835, when a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, Black and Wife.

This a proceeding to recover of the plaintiff in error, the' penalty of one hundred and twenty-five dollars, for failing to attend as a witness.

The facts upon which the court predicated its opinion in this case, are stated in the opinion delivered by Judge Turley; a re-statement is deemed unnecessary.

A paper, purporting to be the last will and testament of John Gibson, deceased, was offered for probate, in the county court of-- county, which being objected to, the court directed an issue to be made up, to try whether the paper offered for probate, was his last will or not. The jury, upon the trial in the circuit court returned a verdict, that said paper, was the last will and testament of said John Gibson, deceased.

The plaintiff in error was indicted in the circuit court of Blount county, for larceny. In the first count, he was charged with having stolen a fifty dollar bank note; in the second, he was charged with having received a fifty dollar bank • note from some person unknown, knowing it to have been stolen; and in the third count, he was charged with having received a fifty dollar bank note from one Henson, a man of color, knowing that he had stolen it.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the' circuit court of Blount county, of tbe offence of receiving two sides'of sole leather, knowing the same to he stolen. The indictment contained two' counts: the first, for'stealing-the leather; the second, for receiving it, knowing it to be stolen. But, before' the jury was impannelled, the court compelled the Solicitor to elect which of the counts he would proceed upon.

At the August term, 1835, of the circuit court for the county of Knox, the prisoner was convicted under the provisions of the act of 1829, c. 23, ■§ 55, of the offence of malicious stabbing, and was sentenced to confinement in the penitentiary for two years. A motion for a new trial was overruled by the court, and this writ of error is prosecuted to reverse the judgment.

This was an indictment against the defendant for perjury, in swearing falsely, in a proceeding in the case of the State vs. Lester and others, tried in tbe circuit court of Giles county.

The plaintiff in error was indicted for keeping “a disorderly common tipling house.” The jury found a special ver-diet “that the defendant on one occasion kept a house in which there was a collection of twenty or thirty negroes more than belonged to the place where he lived, who got drunk, danced and disturbed the neighborhood with noise and uproar” &c. The defendant moved the court in arrest of judgment, büt his motion was overruled and judgment was rendered against him on…

This was a bill of indictment, charging the defendant with being guilty of the offence of keeping a tippling house, by retailing spiritous liquors’ to be drank at his house, without having a license for that purpose. The proof shows that the defendant had been in the habit of selling liquors by the quart, to be drank in the house, but not in smaller quantities.

This was an indictment for larceny. Tbe first count of the indictment, (upon which the defendant was convicted,) charged “that tbe said Mansel Hite, late of the county aforesaid, upon the twenty-sixth day of September, eighteen hundred and thirty-five, with force and arms, at the county aforesaid, unlawfully and feloniously did steal, take and carry away, one bank note of the Planters’ Bank of Tennessee, payable on demand at the Mechanics'1 and Traders’ Bank at New Orleans,…

The plaintiff in error was indicted for the murder of Peter Elrod, who was found dead with marks of violence on him, on the pine mountain in the county of White.

This is a suit by scire facias on the part of the State against the defendants, on a forfeited recognizance, t-o which-they have pleaded nul tiel record.

This was a presentment for gaming. The defendant pleaded in .abatement, “that it was not made upon the knowledge of the grand jury, hut upon information communicated by others.” Upon demurrer the court below held this plea to be bad. The defendant prosecuted a writ of error to this .court.

This was an indictment against the defendant for obstructing a public road. The obstruction consisted in running .a fence across that portion of the old road, which was discontinued by an order made by the county court, which order was however void.

The plaintiff was convicted in the circuit court of Giles county of the crime of forgery. The objection here taken to the Judgment of the circuit court, is limited to. the manner in which the offence is charged in the bill of indictment. The instrument set forth as a forgery in the bill of indictment is as follows; $75.

The plaintiff in error was indicted and convicted for retailing spiritous liquors without license. In taxing the costs of the prosecution, the clerk charged a tax fee for the solicitor general of twenty-five dollars. A motion was made to quash the execution, which the court refused to do, and an appeal in «error was taken to this court.

The material facts shown by the bill of exceptions are, that the prisoner, in February 1836, applied to Aaron D. Cochran, the keeper of a livery stable in Nashville, to hire a horse for two days, in order to go to Murfreesborough, alleging that he must return on the next day to take the stage for Huntsville, where he said he resided. He stated also that keen boarding two days or three days at the Nashville -Inn, which was proved to be false.

The plaintiff in error was indicted in the circuit court of Bedford county for burglary and larceny. He was acquitted of the burglary, but convicted of the larceny. In addition to other testimony adduced upon the trial, the State offered in evidence the confessions or statements of the prisoner. Hezekiah Bennett stated, that he took the prisoner aside and told him that he liad stolen the money; the prisoner denied it.

The defendants in error, obtained before a Justice of the Peace, in a suit commenced by attachment, a Judgment against one Thomas H. McDonald; and the plaintiff in error, upon a garnishment citation, had judgment rendered against him before the justice, as the debtor of McDonald, from which he appealed to the circuit court.

This is an action of covenant, brought by the defendants in error on a contract under seal, by which the intestate of the plaintiffs in error promised on or before the first day of March, 1834, to pay the sum of one hundred dollars in good bailed cotton, at his gin in Hickman county, and the breach assign ed, is, that neither the intestate nor his administrator had done so.

This suit commenced before a justice. The warrant is as follows; “Slate of Tennessee, Marion County.

This was an action of debt founded upon tbe following note, made by tbe defendant, and payable to the plaintiff. “Two years after date, I promise to pay William S. Scott one bun-dred and twenty-five dollars for bis part of the hire of a negro man by the name of Jacob, the property of his father, which has been detained from said William S. Scott’s estate, by the administrators from 1819, to 1828, given under my hand, this 27th day ofSeptember, 1831, bearing interest from the…

The covenant upon which this suit was founded, was as- follows: “Whereas, I, Jonathan Whitesides, have this day received from John • Caldwell a deed of conveyance for four hundred acres of land in the Illinois Territory, which he was entitled to as the heir at law of his brother Robert Caldwell, wbo was entitled to the same in consequence of his having improved it previous to the year 1791.

The facts proved in this case W'ere’, that on the 15th of No vernber, 1816, the defendant, Dance, and one John Spain, jointly executed their bond to Atkinson, in the penalty of sixty pounds two shillings and eight pence, Virginia currency, conditioned for the,payment of thirty pounds' one Shilling and four pence, on demand. The bond itself recites that the obligors were citizens of Wilson county, Tennessee, and the obligee of Virginia.

This is ap action .of ejectment prosecuted by Chester M’Gee against Conrad and Manlove, for a tract of land in th.e county of Robertson. M’Gee claims title by virtue of an ex? ecution sale and sheriff’s deed to him, founded on a judgment .which he obtained against Henry DainWood, in a suit which was commenced by attachment.

The defendants in error, N. and J. Dick & Co. as assignees of John Cain, recovered a judgment before a justice of the peace for Warren county, against John Chantion,sH. O. T. Heald and Stephen D. Hill, for the sum of eighty dollars and forty-one cents, debt, besides costs; which judgment was tendered 29th March, 1834, and was founded on a note for seventy-nine dollars and twenty-three cents.

Ou the 14th April, 1831, the intestate of the plaintiff in error, made his note of hand, under seal, to the defendants in error, for twelve hundred and thirty-three dollars and 17 cents, which by the terms of it fell due on the 17th August, 1831. In July, 1831, administration on the personal estate of Wiley, who bad departed this life, was duly granted to the plaintiff in error.

This was an action of debt, to which the defendant pleaded nil debit and the statute of limitation of three years. To the last plea there was a demurrer.

The facts of this' case which were' agreed on' By the parties, show, that at the February term, 1832, of the circuit court for Giles county, Thomas P' Shelton- recovered a judgment against Mason Upshaw and others;- for the' sum of two-thousand and ninety-one dollars, tern cents, and costs; that at the April term, 1834, of the chancery court, holden at Pulaski, Frederick Schelter and Phillip-''Schelter'recovered á judgment against the said- Maso» Upshaw fed others', for the…

'This is an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiffs .against the defendant, on a bill of lading in the words and figures following, “Shipped in good order and well conditioned, by Carter and Nye, on board the good flat boat, called the ■-whereof is owner and master for the present voyage, Ralph Graves, Senr., lying in the port of Pulaski and bound for New Orleans,” to say, eighty-two bales of cotton, weighing in all, 31,428 pounds, andaré to be delivered in like good…

This is an action of assumpsit brought by Nichol vs. Crowder, on the 22d March, 1836. The pleas are non-assump-sit and stat. lim. The proof is, that Nichol sold to Crowder a stud horse, for which Crowder was to give him a note on Jesse M. and Charles Wade, for one hundred and fifty dollars. The contract was made in 1830. Crowder was to take the stud without recourse upon Nichol, and Nichol was to take the note without' recourse upon Crowder.

This is an action of ejectment from the Maury circuit court. The bill of exceptions shows that John Smith claimed one thousand acres of land in Maury county, and in 1806, applied to-- Hunter to run his south boundary line, that he might ascertain its locality, as he was about to settle his son Moses Smith, in the south-west corner of his tract.

<p>All the facts necessary to understand this case, are stated in the opinion of the court,</p>

This is an action of ejectment, on the trial of which, various questions arose, all of which it is not necessary to state. Held: and by this court decided, that a tenant may by his own act convert his possession into an adverse possession to his landlord, 3 John. Rep. 290: 2 Sch. and Lef. 624, and Peck’s R 400. So a tenant in common. 5 Peters 438-40: 3 Peters 53.

This is a scire facias against the administrator of Robert Vance to revive and have execution of a judgment obtained _byThe Bank of the State against Robert Vance and Joel C. RiceT “The judgment was rendered on the twentieth day of April 1826, in the county court of Montgomery county, for ^le sum °f four hundred and forty dollars, and thirty cents'* and costs of suit.

This was a petition filed by the plaintiff in error, in the county court of Maury county, at its June term 1S34, to Set aside the probate of a paper, purporting to be the last will and testament of William Gibson, deceased, and praying that an issue may be directed to try whether or not said paper is the last will and testament of said William Gibson deceased. The petition in substance alleged that the petitioners are heirs at law of said William Gibson, deceased.

This was üil action brought against the defendant as a common carrier, to recover the value of some books, which were received for carriage and carried in his wagon from Franklin to Columbia. The cause was twice tried in the circuit court of Maury county. Upon the first trial, the plaintiff below recovered a verdict for four hundred and forty dollars. This was set aside and a new trial granted.

This action was brought to recover the State tax alleged to be due from the defendants as owners of the Rolling Mill adjoining the town of Nashville. The facts agreed by the parties were as follows: that the land on which the Rolling Mill stands is a part of the tract vested in the trustees of Davidson Academy and their successors in office, by the State of North Carolina, by an act of her legislature passed in 1785. See Iredell’s private acts, c. 29, § 7.

This is an indictment charging the plaintiff in error with having extortiously, and by color of his office of constable, received from Robert G. Cummings fifty cents, as a levying fee, due to him upon an execution which he had against the goods and chattels of said Cummings, when in truth and in fact he never levied such execution, and no fee therefor was due him.

This was an 'action of assumpsit brought by tbe State of Tennessee, against the Union Bank of Tennessee, to recove» tbe amount of taxes alleged to be due to the State, by virtue of the acts of 1835-6, chapters 13 and 14.

In this case, a judgment was obtained by the defendant in error against one of the plaintiffs in error; upon which a ca-pias ad satisfaciendum issued, was executed, and a bond, with the other plaintiff in error as surety, was taken, under the provisions of the acts of 1824 and 1825, conditioned to appear at the return term of the writ, and pay the debt or take the insolvent debtors oath.