THE plaintiff, in his declaration, stated, “ that at New-Port, the defendants, by said William Tilley, purchased af said deceased a quantity of hemp, to be manufactured . at their rope factory m A cw-London, on a credit of four months, and to secure payment thereof, the defendants, at said Mew-Port, by said William Tilley, one oí said firm and company, and then joint mechanic and trader with said James Tilley as aforesaid, made, executed, and to said deceased, then in full life, delivered a certain writing or promissory note, in the words and figures following, viz.

“We, William Tilley and company, of Mew-London,promise to pay Christopher Champlin, of Mew-Port, or his order, within four months from the date hereof, five hundred and eighty dollars, value received. Witness our hands, Mew-Port, January, 31st, 1804.

“ William Tilley is? Co.

“ Witness,

‘‘ George G. Whitehorne

When the cause came on for trial, William Tilley, who had failed and absconded, was defaulted; James Tilley, the father of William, and a man of property, ap' peared and pleaded non assumpsit.

called upon the plaintiff’s counsel for evidence, that the plaintiff was executor to the deceased. He said, that unless this were shown, there was no propriety in proceeding any farther in the cause. He stated, at the same time, that no letters testamentary, Issued by any authority out of the state of Connecticut, could be admitted as evidence before the courts of this state, according to a decision of the Supreme Court of Errors, at their last session in Hartford.(a)

replied, that he was somewhat surprised by the motion, though he apprehended, that the defendant was too late.withút, and tbit advantage ought lo have been taken by plea in abatement, as the want of lawful appointment to be executor is a disqualification to sue in this case.

Livingston, J. having inquired, whether there was a proferí of letters testamentary, was answered in the negative, and that it was not common in our practice to make such a proferí, the mere naming the plaintiff as executor being considered as sufficient to enable the defendant to plead ne ungues executor.

His honour then observed, that it must undoubtedly be good law, that letters testamentary should be used only within the jurisdiction under which they were issued, and that he should have no doubt, in a proper st ige of the proceeding, as to requiring the production of such letters issued under the authority of the state of Connecticut: and he did not see but the plaintiff in this case must produce his claim to the character of executor, if the defendant required it.

At the request of the plaintiff’s counsel, the question was permitted to rest till afternoon, as he wished to look at authorities, that he might be able to show that the defendant was too late in his motion.

This was assented to by the court.

.At the opening of the court in the afternoon,

…

Citation profile

How this case has been treated — in progress