¶1Opinion by
¶2This case simply decides that the petitioner, having been charged, under the principles declared in Lay v. Lay (10 S. <?., 216), with one-sixth part of the note for slaves described in that case, and the amount of such sixth part having been ascertained and adjudged by a decree of the Circuit Court, from which no appeal was taken, the petitioner could not afterwards have such amount reduced because of a compromise subsequently entered into between the parties to that note. Judgment of court below (Witherspoon, J.) affirmed.