Volume 4 — Arkansas Reports

Writ of Error to the Circuit Court of PulasJd County. Debt, on a sheriff's bond, brought by the State for the use of Bettison, against Lawson, sheriff of Pulaski county, and Thorn, one of his securities in the bond, and determined in the Pulaski circuit court in April 1847, before Hon. Wm. H. Sutton, judge.

<p>The Supreme Court has full power to issue writs of habeas corpus, and to try and determine the same.</p> <p>But the petition must exhibit a properly certified copy of the warrant, order, or process, by which the prisoner is restrained of his liberty, or show that the demand could be made for it, or has been made and refused.</p> <p>And if it merely states that prisoner stands indicted for murder, and that there has been a mis-trial, and exhibits a copy of the indictment, the petition will be refused.</p>

This was an action of covenant tried in the Chicot circuit court, in January, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges.

Writ of JCrror to Pulaski Circuit Court. Debt, on a constable’s bond, brought by the State, for the uso of Eller, against Faulkner, the principal in the bond, and Wood-ruff and Williams, his securities therein, and determined in the Pulaski circuit court, at the October term, 184G, before the lion. Wv¡. II. Fj:ild, judge. The suit was instituted 15th February, 1843.

This was an indictment under the statute against carrying concealed weapons, tried- in the Chicot Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1839, before the Hon. Euclid L. Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The indictment was quashed on the motion oí Buzzard, on the ground that the law was unconstitutional; and the State appealed. After advisement, the following opinions were delivered:

Writ of Error to the Circuit Court of Pope County. Debt, on a promissory note, brought by Wilson Brown against Sterling Vaughn to the March Term, 1847, of the Pope circuit court.

Writ of Error to Pope Circuit Court. Debt, in the Pope circuit court, by Gregory against Bewly, Langford and Bruton, on a writing obligatory. The case has been to this court before. See Gregory vs. Bewly et air, 5 Ark. R. 318. After the cause was remanded, the death of Langford'was suggested, the cause revived against his executors, and judgment by default taken against them and Bruton.

Writ of Error io the Pulaski Circuit Court. Assumpsit, for the hire of slaves, brought by Jane Adamson against John Adamson, determined in the Pulaski circuit court, at the April Term, 1847, before the Hon. W. H. Sutton, judge. In a bill of particulars filed by plaintiff, she claimed of the defendant $250 for the hire of two negro boys, Bill and Henson, for one year, commencing January 15th, 1844, with interest from the 15th January, 1845.

Writ of Error to the Washington Circuit Court. Sawyer sued Crawford before a justice of the peace of Washington county upon account, in September, 1S45, and obtained judgment. Crawford removed the case into the circuit court by certiorari, and the judgment of the justice was quashed for irregularities.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. The State brought an action of debt, for the use of the Bank of the State of Arkansas, to the April Term, 1843, of the Pulaski circuit court, upon the official bond of the sheriff of Johnson county, against Wm. Adams, James P. Patterson, Samuel Adams, John W. Patrick, and Joseph James, securities in the bond. A writ of summons was issued to the sheriff of Johnson county, and served upon the defendants.

Writ of Error to the Crawford Circuit Court. Debt, by the Bank of the State of Arkansas against Scott, on a promissory note, determined in the Crawford circuit court, August Term, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, judge. The defendant filed a special plea as follows: “ And now at this term comes the defendant, and craves oyer of the writing sued on in this case, and it is read to him in words and figures following, to wit: ‘$735. Fayetteville, 3d March, 1842.

Assumpsit, by Murray against Clay, determined in tbe Jackson circuit court, November, 1847, before the Hon. W. C. Scott, judge. Plaintiff declared in indebitatus assumpsit, for work and labor, goods, wares and merchandise, money advanced, paid, laid out and expended, and money had and received, &c. &c. The cause was tried on the general issue, and verdict and judgment for defendant.

Enos Yoes was indicted in the Washington circuit court for an assault and battery upon James C. Hughs. He was tried on the plea of not guilty, at the May Term, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. W. Floyd, judge, convicted and fined ten dollars.

This was an action of debt, tried in June, 1841, in tbe Circuit Court of Independence county, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank of the State sued upon a bond for ,§255, executed to her by one defendant as principal, and the others as securities, jointly and severally, payable at the Branch at Batesville.

Assumpsit, by S. & G. Turner against Greenwood, upon an inland bill of exchange, determined in the Benton circuit court, at the May Term, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, judge- The declaration alleged that on the sixth day of September, 1844, Greenwood drew a bill on Pelham in favor of plaintiffs at sixty days. That on the 28th November, 1844, the bill was presented for acceptance, and not accepted, of which Greenwood was duly notified.

Writ of Error to the Yell Circuit Court. This was an action of trover brought by James F. Gaines, as administrator of Gazway Haynes, deceased, against Malissa Haynes, James Briggs, and James Gault, and determined in the Yell circuit court, at the September Term, 1847, before the Hon. W.m. W. Floyd, judge.

Debt, by petition, determined in tlie Phillips circuit court, at the May Term, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. C. Scott, judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of this court. As statutes of limitation affect the remedy, it has become a fundamental principle that it is competent to enlarge or shorten the period of limitation, although the legislature cannot revive a right of action once barred.

This was an indictment tried in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in March, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges.

Writ of Error to the Circuit Court of Sevier County. This was an action of covenant brought by Wm. A. Brewer, as administrator of John Brewer, deceased, against Bizzell and Owens, and determined in the Sevier circuit court, at the July Term, 1847, before the Hon. C. C. Scott, then one of the circuit judges.

This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Henry Freeman against Job Hammond, determined in the circuit court of Madison county, at the May Term, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, judge. Plaintiff declared for money paid, laid out and expended by him to, and for the use of defendant, at his request. The declaration was filed by W. D. Reagan and J. B. Costa, attorneys for plaintiff.

On the application of Jonas Levy, a writ of mandamus issued out of this Court, to William K. Inglish, a Justice of the Peace for Big Rock township, in the county of Pulaski, reciting, in substance, that, on the first day of November, 1841, Inglish rendered judgment in favor of Washington Noel, against Levy, for thirty-six dollars, upon tbe verdict of a jury then given for that amount, upon a trial had before him, and for costs of suit; that Levy then and there prayed an…

<p>By moving for a new trial, a party abandons previous exceptions, unless he incorporates them in the motion, and reserves them by bill of exceptions to the decision of the court overruling tho motion.</p> <p>The decision of the court below overruling a motion for a new trial, will not be reviewed by this court unless the evidence is put upon record: the presumption is in favor of the correctness of the decision.</p> <p>A memorandum signed by the judge, slating that certain facts were proven, is not part of the record.</p>

Writ of Error to Lawrence Circuit Court. On the 28th July, 1845, Wm. Moore sued Larkin Hensley before a justice of the peace of Lawrence county, on a writing: obligatory for $23 32, dated October 11th, 1838, and due first of January,, 1839. The defendant, says the justice’s transcript,, “pleaded limitation on the case, which plea was overruled,” and judgment rendered for plaintiff for the amount of the obligation.

This was an action of ejectment, tried in the Circuit Court of Hot Spring county, in August, A. D. 1840, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. At the February Term, A. ©. 1840, the case was continued, by consent of parlies; and at the next Term, judgment by default was rendered against Rogers, the defendant, who sued his writ of error. contended that there was no sufficient process or service, to warrant a judgment by default.

This was an action of debt, instituted by Bennett and others, and determined in Jackson Circuit Court, in May, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The defendants in error sued on a note, as assignees of Ferdinand C. Fletcher and Asa M. Carpenter, assignees of Jesse Dougherty.

<p>"Where a county court exceeds its jurisdiction, its acts are void, and this court has power, on the proper showing, to remove its proceedings by certiorari, and q.uash them.</p> <p>Under the 42d chap, of the Digest, the county court has power to make an order for the building of a court-house whenever there is sufficient funds in the county treasury, not otherwise appropriated, for that purpose, or may levy a tax therefor', but such tax cannot be laid without an order of the court made after a notification of all the justices of the county to attend for that purpose.</p> <p>It is possible, however, that a county may have an ample fund for the erection of a court-house, without a dollar in the treasury: an instance supposed by Way o'f illustration.</p> <p>In such case, the county court may order a court-house erected without a notification to all the justices to attend.</p> <p>The statute requiring the commissioner of public buildings to take bond of the person who undertakes the erection of the court-house, is directory, and his failure to do so does not affect the jurisdiction of the county court over the subject matter.</p>

This was an action of debt, instituted by Pitcher & Walters, and determined in Yan Burén Circuit Court, iti May, A. D. 1841, before' , the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. It was founded on a promissory note for $,‘169 28, payable ten days after date, with interest at the rate of ten per cent, per annum. The breach assigned in the declaration, negatives the payment of the debt, but is wholly silent as to the interest.

This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Union Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1835, before the Hon. Edward Cross, one of the Territorial Judges. William and Ebenezer Lane sued Thomas Franklin, in assumpsit. The declaration contained three counts.

Trespass on the case, brought by Wood against Ferrier in the Marion circuit court, and determined at the April Term, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, one of the circuit judges. There were two counts in the declaration: the first in case, alleging in substance, that on the 24th October, 1846, plaintiff delivered to defendant a brown bay mare, the property of plaintiff, to be taken care of and safely kept by defendant for the plaintiff, and redelivered on request.

This was an indictment for larceny, tried in the Franklin Circuit Court, in September, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. Alfred Waller, Henderson Waller, and Roberson Waller, were tried and convicted, and appealed to this Court. The facts of the case will be found in the opinion of the Court.

This was an issue as to the validity of a will, tried in the Jackson Circuit Court, in May, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Writ of Error to the Pulaski Circuit Court. Replevin, by Carroll B. Humphries and John B. Humphries, against Pleasant MeCraw, determined in the Pulaski circuit court, at the October Term, 1846, before the Hon. Wm. H. Feild, judge. The action was commenced in White, and venue changed to Pulaski county.

Debt, upon a bond executed by Brittin and others, to Samuel Gray, administrator, or Lucy Gray, administratrix, oí'Matthew Gray, deceased; determined in the Mempslead Circuit Court, in O.lobers A. D. 1841, before the I ton. Wiimaiu Conw/v? B., one of ¡.No Circuit Judges. The defendant, Brittin, demurred to the declaration,; and his demurrer being overruled, judgment went against hint,, smd hr. sued his writ of error.

This case was tried in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in March, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clenhenin, one of the Circuit Judges. It was an action of replevin, in the detinet, brought by Amy Calloway, against Hardy Robinson, for a negro boy named Mordecai, who was replevied and delivered to the plaintiff below.

Webb, on which he had levied an execution in favor of William Cummins, the relator.

Writ of Erren' to Pulaski Circuit Court. Trespass vi et armis, brought by Catharine M. Magruder against Lewis Snapp, determined in the Pulaski circuit court, at the October Term, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. H. Feild, judge. The declaration alleged that on the first of March, 1844, defendant took, carried away and converted to his own use, certain house-hold furniture, the property of plaintiff.

This was an action on the case, for a libel, tried in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in March, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clen-denin, one of the Circuit Judges. Held: that they cannot be noticed in a court of errors, though brought up on certiorari. Hart vs. Seixas, 21 Wend. 40.

Bill to foreclose a mortgage, filed by Edward B. Alexander against John Griffith, John H. T. Main, and William M. Bennett, Joseph Bennett and Frederick Montgomery, partners under the style of William M. Bennett & Co., determined in the Crawford cireuit court, chancery side, at the August Term, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. W. Floyd, judge.

This was an action of assumpsit brought by Campbell and Cureton, late merchants and partners, for the use of Williamson S. Oldham, against Sebron G. Sneed, and determined in the Washington Circuit Court, at the May term, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, judge. The action was commenced August the 7th, 1841, and the plaintiffs demanded of defendant (for the use of Oldham) one hundred and fifty dollars for goods, wares and merchandise before then sold by them to defendant.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. Tilia was an action of assumpsit, originally brought by Brene-man, assignee of Brungard, against Inglish & Johnson, Win. Cummins and L. Gibson, on a promissory note for §3014, dated March 4th, 1839, and payable twenty-four months after date. Gibson was not served with process, and the suit was discontinued as to him.

Debt, tried in Pulaski Circuit Court, in March, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The Real Estate Bank sued Roswell Beebe and others, on a note executed by them, and made no profert of the note. The defendants demurred, for want of profert, and the demurrer being overruled, judgment went for the debt, and interest at ten per centum per annum, from the maturity of the note until it should be paid. The defendants sued their writ of error.

Replevin by Berry against Singer, determined in the Bradley circuit court at the April term, 1848, before the Hon. Wm. H. Feild, judge. Verdict for defendant, and motion for new trial overruled; plaintiff excepted, prayed an appeal, filed the necessary affidavit, and entered into recognizance, but no order of court granting the appeal appears in the transcript. moved to dismiss.

This was an action of assumpsit, instituted by Josiah Brummel, against Daniel E. Williams, and tried in the Hempstead Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1811, before the Hon. William Conway B., one of the Circuit Judges. The declaration contained several counts; but the liability was claimed to exist on account of the payment, by Brummel, of certain notes executed by one Parskill Motley and Williams, to Wm.

Application to affiim a Judgment. On the first December, 1848, Johnathan H. Chaney was convicted of arson in the Washington circuit court, and sentenced to the penitentiary for two years. He appealed from the judgment of the court, and the court ordered that the appeal operate as a stay of execution. Defendant also entered into recognizance, as authorized by statute in such cases.

Writ of Error to Crawford Circuit Court. Assumpsit, by Weaver as administrator of Rose, use of Knox, against Hixon, determined in the Crawford circuit court, at the August term, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, judge. The suit was brought to the February term, 1847. At the return term, a demurrer was sustained to the declaration, and the case continued with leave to amend. On the second day of the following term' (August 2d) the plaintiff filed an amended declaration.

This was an action of trespass vi et armis brought by Wiley Dixon against George C. Watkins, James M. Curran, Ebenezer Cummins and Gordon N. Peay, and determined in the Pulaski circuit court in June, 184G, before E. II. English, as special judge.

Debt, determined in Conwaj Circuit Court, in September, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. Burnett sued Nimrod Menifee and James Menifee, alleging, in his declaration, that the former resided in the county of Conway, and the latter in the county of Pope, and issued a summons, to the sheriff of Conway, against both, which was executed on Nimrod Meni-fee, and returned, as to James Menifee, non esl.

Debt, tried in the Benton Circuit Court, in May, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, one of the Circuit Judges.

Debt, by Phillips, for the use of McFarland, against Lemoyne, determined in Conway Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. The term of the Court to which the writ was returnable, wa3 by law to be holden on the “ second Monday after the fourth Monday of September,” being the eleventh day of October.

This was a suit by petition in debt, under the statute, brought by David Walker against James Mitchell, on a note “ to be paid in Arkansas State Bank paper,” tried in Washington Circuit Court, in May, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, one of the Circuit Judges. Judgment went by default for the sum mentioned in the note, as debt, and the interest accrued, as damages and costs. Mitchell sued his writ of error.

D. 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the Circuit Judges. Creed Taylor brought an action of forcible entry and detainer, under the statute, against John McLain, in Desha county, before two Justices of the Peace, and obtained judgment of restitution, from which McLain appealed to Desha Circuit Court.

Debt, determined in Crawford Circuit Court, in February, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richabd C. S. Bbown, one of the Circuit Judges. Ward sued Henry on a note for $>641 44 cents, bearing ten percent, interest, due Jan. 14,1840. The Sheriff executed the summons on Henry; but did not state that he executed it in Crawford county.

Debt, determined in Conway Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. William Carter, as executor of the last will of Jane Ellis,, .sued Nimrod Menifee. The declaration was in every respect sufficient, and contained a profert of the letters testamentary, granted to the plaintiff as executor of the last will and testament of Jane Ellis, deceased.

This was a suit determined in the Crawford Circuit Court, in February, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. Featherston and Wilson, in the Court below, by declaration, commencing, “William G. Featherston, the plaintiff in this suit, by attorney, complains of Robert Wilson, defendant in this suit, in an action of assumpsit.” It then stated that Wilson, on a day and at a place certain, made a note to Wm.

This was an action of debt, tried in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. Pitcher, Weaver & Co., sued Samuel G. Trowbridge & Richard T. Jennings, as partners, on a note executed by their firm name. The defendants pleaded nil debet, without swearing to the plea. Upon the issue, no other evidence being produced than the note, the plaintiff had judgment.

This was a case determined in Pope Circuit Court, in March, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. John Willson was summoned to appear before a justice of the peace, to answer the complaint of Wm. R. Light, assignee of E. D. Watson. Before the summons issued, the affidavit of Watson was filed, that he had lost the note sued on.

Independence Circuit Court. This was an action of debt, by attachment, brought by West J. Fowler against Patrick H. Childress, upon a promissory note, and determined in the Independence circuit court, at the May term, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. C. Scott, judge.

Debt, on a bond for $595, with interest at ten per cent., determined in Jefferson Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the Circuit Judges. John Palmer sued Brooks and others, upon a declaration with a single count, the breach of which alleged the non-payment of the principal alone. The defendant demurred to the declaration, in short, on the record.

Debt on bond, determined in Pope Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. Plea, payment ante diem. Demurrer to plea sustained, and judgment for plaintiffs.

Debt, by Smith, Hubbard & Co., against Hickey and others, determined in Pope Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. An instrument, staling the plaintiffs to be non-residents, was filed, before suing out the writ, in the form of a bond for costs in every way, except that it was not sealed.

Assumpsit, by Fortenberry, against Frazier & Tunstall, determined in Independence Circuit Court, in June, A- D. 1841, before the Hon. Thomas- Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The suit was instituted in Independence county. There was a change of venue, according to the provisions of the statute in such cases, ordering the cause to be removed to Yan Burén county.

This was an appeal-from the Probate Court of Lafayette county, tried in September, 1841, in-the Lafayette Circuit Court, before the Hon. William Conway B., one of the Circuit Judges. The firm of Sarah Percifull & Co., composed of Samuel P. Carson and Sarah Percifull, purchased a quantity of articles of McLain & Badgett.

This was a suit determined in Crawford Circuit Court, in February, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. Hawkins sued Hensley in debt, upon a note executed in 1836, by Hensley, to Owen Webb, and assigned by Webb to the plaintiff. The defendant demurred, on the ground that the plaintiff had mistaken his action, and that there was no immediate liability shown, moving from defendant to plaintiff.

Debt, on a bond for ‡500, due at 12 months, and payable 'at the Branch of the State Bank at Batesville, with ten per cent, interest till paid, tried in Independence Circuit Court, in June, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. Tun-stall’s declaration stated the bond as payable generally, and the breach was silent as to the interest.

Sci. fa. on recognizance, tried in Pulaski Circuit Court, in March, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clenbehin, one of the Circuit Judges. WilliamB.

This was a case tried in Pope Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Riciiaed C. S. Beown, one of the Circuit Judges. Mephj Dobbs, as administrator of the estate of Lewis Eu-banks, deceased, sued John Eubanks, son of the itestate, in trover, for the conversion by him, in the lifetime of the intestate, of sundry articles of property, and choses in action, belonging to the intestate.

This was an action of debt, tried in Washington Circuit Court, in November* A. D. 1841* before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge? one of the Circuit Judges. John Dillard sued Lewis Evans, in debt, on. a note, executed March 17, 1840, and payable in “ common currency of Am kansasP.

Wril of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. Scire facias to revive and continue the lien of a judgment recovered by Joel Johnson, for the use of Ashley & Watkins, against James C. Anthony, and afterwards revived in the name of John Humphries as administrator of Johnson; determined in the Pulaski circuit court, in June, 1846, before E. H. English, as special judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of this court.

<p>This was an action of assumpsit, tried in Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges.</p> <p>Sanger sued Trowbridge & Jennings, as partners, in assumpsit, on an account for furniture, &c.,sold and delivered. The case was tried on the pleas of non-assumpsit, and set-oiF, and Sanger obtained a verdict for ‡519 12.</p> <p>The defendants then moved for a new trial, on affidavits and certain papers, and their motion being overruled, they excepted. The bill of exceptions sets out the Evidence, in substance, as follows: The plaintiff’s only witness proved the presentation by him to Trowbridge of a bill, precisely like the bill of partnership filed. Trowbridge cast up the bill, and said that if Sanger would deduct $100, he would pay it. He claimed no other credits than those allowed in the bill, but a deduction of $100 for mattresses which were too short. The bill was in the hand-writing of Sanger. Witness presented two bills, but did not recollect their respective amounts. They were presented at different times. The bill filed in the case was presented last; was positive there was no credit for $234 in the last bill; and did not remember as to there being such a credit on the first. Trowbridge said nothing about rather paying than having a law-suit. Witness delivered two loads of mattresses, but did not say to whom,, and one dozen chairs. The mattresses had each a small hole in the end, which it might have required two minutes to sew up. Such a hole is generally left in mattresses. The account so proveo was for ijGi'L, with a credit of $140.</p> <p>The defendants then oííercd a receipt, signed by Sanger, and attached, by a wafer, to an account of Trowbridge & Jennings, against Sanger. The receipt bore no date, and was in these words: “Received, of R. Jennings, the sum of five hundred dollars, to apply on account of Trowbridge & Jennings.” The above amount is in full for the said five hundred dollars. The Court refused to permit the receipt to be read in evidence, and the defendants saved the point, but took no bill of exceptions until after the motion for a new trial was overruled. No other evidence was given.</p> <p>The Court instructed the jury, that it was necessary for the plaintiff to have proved that Trowbridge & Jennings were partners, and that positive proof was not required to establish that fact, but it might be inferred by the jury from circumstances. No exception was taken to these instructions.</p> <p>The defendants moved for a new trial, because the verdict was against law, evidence, and tiic instructions of the Court, the discovery of new evidence, and the error of the Court in excluding the receipt from the jury.</p> <p>Trowbridge’s affidavit, presented with this motion, stated that, since the trial, he had discovered that Wm. Caldwell was a material witness for him, and could give testimony material to the issue; and that, before the trial, he did not know that Caldwell knew any thing about it; that he'had told him, since the trial, that Sanger had fold him, in 1840, that Trowbridge & Jennings did not owe him much; that Jennings had paid him five hundred dollars for Trowbridge & Jennings, which payment he considered better than Arkansas money; that he intended to take Caldwell’s testimony, but he left on a steam-boat before he did so; believes he can procure it, &c. He further stated, that, since the trial, he had discovered, among the papers of a suit before commenced in the same, Court, by Sanger, against Trowbridge & Jennings, and dismissed, a. bill against them, in Sanger’s band-writing, in which he claimed a balance of only $204 50, which bill he believes to be the same one spoken of by the witness in the case, as presented by him to Trowbridge; and in it is an item, as follows: “Balance due on Mr. Jennings’ account, $234, and a credit for $500; that he made vigilant search for the bill, and was unable to find or discover it until after the trial; that, in the dismissed suit, Sanger had made an affidavit that only $220 was due him from Trowbridge & Jennings, which affidavit was made February 16, 1841.</p> <p>The account, which Trowbridge could not find before the trial, was attached to, and made part of, a deposition taken by him and Jennings, in the dismissed suit, and on file in that suit. The deponent stated that he procured mattresses of Sanger for them; that one De-vinney was owing them $107, of which Sanger agreed to pay them $100, (credited on the bill of particulars); that the mattresses were open at one end, and Sanger said he would send a person to sew them up, which he did not do. That England (the witness in the case) presented him a bill of Sanger’s, against Trowbridge & Jennings, showing a balance due Sanger of $204 50. The bill, so referred to, was filed, and is the same one mentioned in Trowbridge’s affidavit. The defendants sued their writ of error.</p> <p>A writ of error for the refusal of a court to grant a now trial, did not lie, at common law; the granting of such new trial, in any case, being a matter of discretion. Henderson vs. Moore, 5 Cranch, 11. Marine Ins. Co. vs. Young, 5 Cranch, 187. Welch vs. Mandeville, 7 Cranch, 152. Barr vs. Gratz, 4 Wheat. 220. U. S. vs. Daniel, 6 Wheat. 542. McLanahan vs. Un. Ins. Co., 1 Peters, 183. U. S. vs. Buford, 3 Peters, 31. U. S. vs. Gibert, 2 Sumn. 52. Whiteside vs. Jackson, 1 Wend. 423. Reynard vs. Brecknell, 4 Pick. 303. The People vs. Haynes, 14 Wend. 554. The People vs. Dalton, 15 Wend. 583. Anderson vs. The State, 5 Har. & John. 174. McCourry vs. Doremus & Suydam, 5 Hals. 245. Carpenter vs. Gookin, 2 Verm. 295. Chase vs. Davis, 7 Verm. 479. Lewis vs. Hawley, 1 Day, 50. Bloss vs. Kittredge, 5 Verm. 30. Magill vs. Lyman, 6 Conn. 60. Phleming vs. The State, 1 Ala. 42. Law vs. Merrils, 6 Wend. 278. Burke vs. Young, 2 Serg. & R. 383. i lurd vs. Landsdale, 2 Binn. 80. Wright vs. Small, ib. 93. Granger vs. Bissel, 2 Day, 364. Lewis vs. Haw-ley, 1 Conn. 49. White vs. Trinity Church, 5 Conn. 187. Gamer et al. vs. Crenshaw, 1 Scam. Í43. Sawyer vs. Stephenson, Breese, 6. Cornelius vs. Boucher, ib. 12. Clemson vs. Hamper, ib. 162. Collins vs. Claypole, ib. 164. Street vs. Blue,ib. 201. Adams vs. Smith, ib. 221. Vernon vs. May, ib. 229.- Littletons vs. Moses, Breese's App. 9. The rule, in Illinois, was changed, in 1837, by statute. All which cases are express upon the point, and treat it as a matter about which there can be no controversy.</p> <p>The proper office of a writ of error is, to remove the final judgment, with the premises, which are, “ the pleadings between the parties, the proper concurrence of the writ and process, the finding of the jury upon an issue of fact, if any such has been joined, and, lastly, the judgment of the inferior court.” By all the Judges of England, in Mellish vs. Richardson, 9 Bing. 125.</p> <p>Again, upon a writ of error, the decisions of a court or jury, on questions of fact, cannot be reviewed where there has been no erroneous decision on matters of law. The testimony, as well as the law, cannot be submitted to the revision of this Court, upon error. A motion for a new trial is not a part of the proceedings in a cause. It is addressed to the discretion of the Court below. A court of error cannot weigh evidence. Cases cited above, and Graham vs. Cammann, 2 Caine's R. 168; Carver vs. Jackson, 4 Pet. 80; Parsons vs. Armor & Oakley, 3 Pet. 425; People vs. Superior Court of JVew.York, 20 Wend. 664; U. S. vs. Duval, 6 Wheat. 542.</p> <p>By moving for a new trial, the defendants waived all exceptions taken on the trial.</p> <p>The bill of exceptions is irregular. A bill of exceptions is never allowed to detail the evidence, but its office is to state the facts proved, not the evidence which proved them. The People vs. Dalton, 15 Wend. 581.</p>

Motion in Pulaski Circuit Court, against James Lawson, jun., sheriff of Pulaski county, determined in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ceenbenin, one of the Circuit Judges.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. This was an action of debt, brought by tlie Bank of the State of Arkansas against King and Houston, and determined in the Pulaski circuit court, in April, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. H. ■Sutton, judge. The bank declared on a promissory note made to ber by one Stephenson, as principal, and the defendants, and another, as securities. The defendants pleaded payment, to which plaintiff replied.

Tins was an action of assumpsit, by Bertrand against Byrd, determined in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ceendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The first count charged Byrd as acceptor of a bill, drawn on him' by William Mar-low, and accepted, payable “ in a settlement between himself and Bertrand,” without alleging that there had been any settlement.

This was an action of assumpsit, against William H. Bizzell, as endorser of a bill of exchange, payable in New-Qrleans, tried in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The case was tried on the general issue.

<p>An alien wlio lias emigrated to the United States since the 18th of June, 1812, and who was not a minor on his arrival, is not entitled to take the oath of naturalization on five years residence, without having made the declaration of his intention to become a citizen required by the Act of 26th May, 1824, two years before his application to tako the oatli of naturalization. (See Digest Stat.Arh DO.)</p>

Indictment for gaming against Loony McDaniel, Thomas Morse, Jackson Smith, Abraham McCarly and the appellant, John Hany, determined in the Yell circuit court in September Term, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, judge. There were three counts in the indictment.

This was an action of debt, determined in Washington Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, one of the Circuit Judges. Suit was brought in the name of “Archibald Yell, Governor of Arkansas,” successor of James S. Conway, Governor, for the use of James Littlefield and others, against Lucius C. Pleasants and others, his securities, on his bond to James S. Conway, Governor, as sheriff of Washington county.

Debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ctjgndenin, one of the Circuit Judges. Bertrand sued Bjrd, on an instrument signed by Byrd, in the following words: “Due C. P. Bertrand, for cash lent, three hundred dollars. May iO, 1840. _R. C. Byrd;” with the word “ seal” at the end of Byrd’s name, and a scrawl around it. The declaration described the instrument as a writing obligatory.

This was an indictment against the Reverend Thomas Willis, for solemnizing marriage -without the consent of the parent of the young lady, determined in the circuit court of Johnson county in August, 3847, before the Hon. Wst. W. Floyd, judge. The indictment follows: «STATE OF ARKANSAS, County of Johnson. In the Johnson Circuit Court at the March Term thereof, 1847.

This case ivas determined in Clark Circuit Court, in October, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Wieh'am Conway B., one of the Circuit Judges. Duncan & Preston filed their declaration in debt, with the proper affidavit and bond, and sued out a writ of attachment against Barton Richmond. The writ was returned served, by summoning John Wilson, as garnishee, and; no property found. After publication made, judgment by default.

This was an action of debt, determined in Pulaski Circuit Court, in June, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. Robert A. Watkins, as administrator of Ann L. B. Byrd, sued Inglish, Galloway, and Johnston, on a bond, which is set forth in the declaration as follows: “$>500 dolls.

Writ of Error to the Circuit Court of White County. This was an informal suit brought under the act of 5th December, 1846, {Digest, p. 795,) by James Walker against Au-gustin Gatton, in the White circuit court, and determined before Sutton, judge. On the 9th of March, 1847, the plaintiff filed in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of said county, the following note; “$192 91. Searcy, April 1st, 1845.

Lucian 0. Sadler brought an action of assumpsit, by attachment, against Jeremiah Bean, in the Johnson circuit court. The sheriff attached a negro woman named Rlioda, as the slave and property of the defendant. Polly Bean, wife of the defendant, by the said defendant as her trustee, interpleaded, claiming the slave attached as her separate property.

• Debt, on bond, by the Bank, assignee of Henry R. and William L. Hynson, against Pelham, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in August, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges.

Debt, on bond executed by Crary, to Ashley & Beebe, for one thousand dollars, with interest from date at ten per cent., determined in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. • Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. This was an action of debt brought by Thomas S. Drew, as governor of the State of Arkansas, and successor of Archibald Yell, late governor, against John W. Paup, James Trigg, and Richard Pryor, and determined in the Pulaski circuit court, in December, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. II. Feild, judge.

Debt, on recognizance, determined in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges.

Decided on demurrer, in the Circuit Court of Arkansas county, in October, A. D.' 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the Circuit Judges. Debt, on a note payable on demand, by Chase, against Pullen. Declaration entitled, “Arkansas, set. _ In the Arkansas Circuit Court, to the October term thereof, A. D. 1841.” The declaration stated no venue, but was otherwise every way formal.

Debt, by attachment, brought by Baird & Jones, as administrators of Stinnett, against Hughes, and determined in the Yell Circuit Court, in September, 1847, before the Hon. W. W. Floyd, judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Writ of Error to the Johnson Circuit Court. TRoveR, brought by Bartlett Zachary, Jr., against Alfred E. Pace, determined in the Johnson Circuit Court, in March, 1847, before Sneed, judge. The declaration charged the defendant with the trover and conversion of certain writings obligatory, promisory notes, and receipts, the property of plaintiff. The cause was tried on a plea of not guilty, and verdict for defendant.

This was an action of assumpsit, tried in Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, A. D. .1841, before the Hon. John J. Glendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. Carradine & Newman sued John W. Crary, on an account for goods, &c., sold, amounting to $¡111 44 cents, with interest calculated at eight per centum per annum, up to the 15th of June, 1841, amounting, together, to $¡132 70, contracted in Natchez, Mississippi.

Assumpsit by Thomas Frazier against Rowland Edison and Hamilton G. Quarles, determined in the Union circuit court, in «October, 1847, before Hon. George Conway, then one of the circuit judges. The facts are stated in the opinion of this court.

<p>Upon application for a mandamus, by Lewis B. Tully, late one of the Circuit Judges, for a mandamus.</p>

At common law all criminal offences were bailable. The first limitation was in the statute of Westminister, 3 Edward, 1 ch. Other statutes were subsequently passed, restricting the right of justices of the peace to let to bail. 4 Black. 299, 300. Petersdorf on Criminal Proceedings, 10 Law Library, 270. These acts did not apply to the court of King’s Bench, and this court, in taking bail in cases of treason, murder, &c., was only limited by its ■discretion. Com.

This is the suit referred to in the preceding case of Crary vs. Car-radine & Newman.

Debt, in the name of the State, for the use of John Brown, against Clement Brown, Benjamin A. Porter, and Sidney P. Craig, determined in the Phillips circuit court, in May, 1847. before the Hon. Wm. C. Scott, judge. The action was founded on an administrator’s bond, executed by Clement Brown, as administrator of Jacob Hackler, principal, and Porter and Craig, as his securities, bearing date 9th August, 1842.

On application for mandamus. On a petition and exhibits then tiled, Cummins, at the last term of this Court, moved the Court for a writ of mandamus to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Chicot county, commanding him to issue a writ of venditioni exponas, directed to the sheriff of said county, requiring him to sell certain slaves, seized by him to satisfy an execution in favor of the petitioner; against Albert W. Webb, which remain in his hands unsold.

<p>Plaintiff declared against defendant as drawer of an inland bill of exchange, made in New York, and added the common counts. On the trial it was proven that plaintiff sold defendant goods, and received, in part payment thereof, the bill sued on, which was drawn by defendant in favor of plaintiff upon M. & Co., and accepted by them, but there was no proof that plaintiff demanded payment of the bill, at maturity, of the acceptors, and that paymont was refused by them. On this evidence, the plaintiff obtained judgment on the common counts for the price of the goods. Held, that it is well settled in New York, where the contract was made, that a plaintiff is not allowed to resort to the common counts, and base his recovery upon the original consideration after he has lost, by his own laches, his action against defendant upon the bill or note which has been passed to him either as absolute or conditional payment.</p> <p>On the contrary, the rule seems to be that a plaintiff can never recover on the original consideration for which the note or bill was given, until he shows such a state of facts as will authorize him to recover on the note or bill itself.</p> <p>In this case, the plaintiff having failed to fix the liability of defendant as drawer of the bill, by proving demand and refusal of the acceptors, could not resort to the common counts, and recover the original consideration for which the bill was drawn.</p>

In Chancery, tried in April, 1840, in Hempstead Circuit Court, before the Hon. Willta:.i Conway 13., one of the Circuit Judges. On the 13th of June, 1834, John Clark and Allen M. Oakley filed their bill.

<p>Where an inferior tribunal has a discretion, and proceeds to exercise it, this court has no jurisdiction to control that discretion by mandamus; hut if the inferior court refuse to act, or to entertain the question for its discretion, where it is enjoined by law, this court will enforce obedience to the law by mandamus.</p> <p>The statutes in reference to paupers construed, and the county court of Arkansas county compelled by mandamus to take jurisdiction of, and determine, a claim for medical attendance, &c., in the last illness of a person who died in that county destitute of means.</p>

This was an action of debt brought in the name of the State of Arkansas, for the use of Alfred Wallace, against Young Rit-ter, as the administrator of Daniel Ritter, determined in the Washington circuit court, in June, 1847, before the Hon. Wm. W. Floyd, judge. The action was founded upon an administration bond executed by Daniel Ritter, in his lifetime, as administrator of William Ritter.

Proceeding under Chap. 101 of the Revised Statutes, to foreclose a mortgage on land, determined in Pulaski Circuit Court, in April, A. D. 1841. before the Hon. John J. Ceendenin, one of the Circuit Judges.

This was a suit in Chancery, determined in Crawford Circuí in September, 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. Debt, on a sheriff’s bond, determined in the Pulaski circuit court, October term, 1847, before the Honorable William H. Feild, judge.

<p>Application for Supersedeas.</p> <p>The facts are stated by the court.</p>

Writ of Error to the Washington Circuit Court. Proceedings for contempt, determined in the Washington circuit court, at the June term, 1845, before the Hon. S. G. Sneed, judge. The transcript shows the following proceedings in this case in the court below: “ State of Arkansas, Plaintiff,] vs. y Contempt. James P. Neel, Defendant. J STATE OF ARKANSAS, i County of Washington.

The facts are stated by the judges. contended that if the defendant was ousted of his office, by the amendment of the constitution adopted at the November session, 1848, of the Legislature, he was not continued in office until the election and qualification of his successor under the amendment adopted at the November session, 1846; as the latter amendment was made to remedy a particular evil, and not intended to embrace such a case as the present; nor can the judges, when…

This was a suit in Chancery, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in August, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The .bill of William Engles stated, that, in 1835, he and Henry A. Englds, jointly, purchased of William Sea-mans, two tracts of land, described therein, for which they paid $260, and Seamans gave them his bond, to convey the land to them in fee simple.

This was a suit in chancery, determined in the Johnson Circuit Court, in December, 1840, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. The original bill was filed by Joseph Cravens, against Josiah Perry, as administrator of John Ryan.

In Chancery, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in March, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Chgndenin, one of the Circuit Judges. In January, 1840, Archibald Yell tiled his bill in that Court, against Andrew D. Smith and wife, and the heirs of his own deceased wife, ■Maria.

In Chancery, heard in Crawford Circuit Court, in February, 1842, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges.

'The fatíts are stated by the Chief Justice. The recent amendment to the constitution, declaring that the people shall elect their circuit judges, did not vacate the office of defendant. State vs. Scott, ante. In this case, we will regard that point as settled.

This case was presented to the Court on a petition for a mandamus, prayed to be directed to the Hon. John J. Clendenin, Judge of the Fifth Judicial Circuit, requiring him to grant the injunction… Held: that the most appropriate remedy in all trusts, is to be found in a court of equity.

Bill in Ciianceuy, brought by Pulaski County, against Lincoln, King, Moore, Martin, Ingiish and Pendleton, determined in tbe Pulaski circuit court, in June, 1846, before tbe Hon. J. J. Clendenin, then one of tbe circuit judges. The court refused the relief sought by the bill, and complainant appealed. The facts are stated in tbe opinion of this court.

On the 27th day of April, 1846, John C. Hale commenced an action of unlawful detainer against Charles Burke, in the Hot Spring Circuit Court, and the cause was tried at the March term, 1847, before… Held: expired on the first of November, 1845, when plaintiff was entitled to possession, but that Burke refused to deliver up - the premises to plaintiff after demand in writing.

John Quillin, judge of the sixth circuit, sitting in chancery for the county of Ouachita, to grant an injunction in a cause there pending, in Avhich he had refused an injunction. The facts are stated in the opinion of this court.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. This was an action of debt brought by Weaver, as assignee of Pitcher, Officer & Co., against James H. Caldwell, as executor of Charles Caldwell, deceased. The suit was commenced in the Saline Circuit Court, in September, 1845; venue afterwards changed to the Pulaski Circuit Court, where it was determined in June, 1847, before the Hon. William H. Sutton, then one of the circuit judges.

Writ of Error to Washington Circuit Court. The Bank of the State of Arkansas brought an action of debt, in the Washington Circuit Court, against Henry P. Kerby, William Munkers, and William Buchanan, upon a promisory note executed to the Bank by Kerby, as principal, and the other two defendants as his securities, for $410 64, due 23d September, 1844. (The cause was tried at the November term, 1847, before Sneed, judge.) The defendants were all regularly served with process.

Action of debt brought by Roane and others, as trustees of the Real Estate Bank, against Browning, Bozeman, and Thornton, on a p'romisory note due 21st December, 1840, and determined in the Clark Circuit Court, at the September term, Í846. The action was brought to the September term, 1845. At the return term the cause was continued, the record states, by consent of parties.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. This was an action of debt on a forfeited delivery bond, brought by Wm. F. Taylor, Albert Lee, and Lucius D. Pratt, against Allen McLain and Patrick Flanakin, in the Pulaski circuit court, and determined at the October term, 18465 before the Hon. Wm. H. Feild, judge.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. In April, 1847, E. C. Crumbacker sued Tucker & Hamilton, merchants and partners, before justice Hutt, on the following account: Messrs. Tucker & Hamilton, To E. C. Crumbacker, Dr. To 10 pieces Virginia Osnaburg muslin, mark [diamond] C., Norristown, Ark.; and sold by Messrs.

Application to set aside a Supersedeas. This was an application to set aside and vacate a supersedeas ■ granted by the chief justice in vacation to a decree of the Hemp-stead circuit court. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Writ of Error to the Saline Circuit Court. This, case was determined in the Saline Circuit Court, at the March term, 1847', before Sutton, judge.

Replevin in the detinet, brought by Bonham against Phelan, and determined in the Washington Circuit Court, in November, 1847, before the Hon. Sebeon G. Sneed, then one of the circuit judges. The action was brought by the plaintiff to recover a grey mare.

Assumpsit, by William B. Pool, against Horace F. Walworth, determined in the Chicot Circuit Court, at the November term, 1847, before the Hon. William H. Suttojt, then one of the circuit judges. The action was commenced 29th March, 1847.

Writ of Error to Johnson Circuit Court. On the 14th February, 1840, Henry Smith, Senior, filed in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court of Johnson county, a petition in debt, stating that he was the legal owner of a note executed by John B. Howell and John Howell, to Henry Smith, Junior., setting out the note, and praying judgment for the amount thereof.

This was an action of debt, determined in Jefferson Circuit Court, in April, 1841, before the Eon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges. It was founded on a note executed by Causin, payable on demand, with legal interest thereon till paid. Declaration and writ against Gerard N. Causin. Judgment against G. N. Causin, for debt, and interest from the date of the note, as damages, by default.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in August, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. Declaration on a bond executed to the Bank of the State of Arkansas, on the 28th of April, 1840, due at six months.

William S. Lockert filed, for allowance and classification, in the Probate Court of Pulaski county, a claim, against the estate of Alexander Burton, deceased, for $250, for services rendered, by Lockert, to Burton, in recovering certain slaves. The account was duly probated, and had previously been presented to Burton’s administrator for allowance, and by him rejected.

■ Action of debt, by James McVicar, against James H. Caldwell, as executor of Charles Caldwell, deceased, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, (on change of venue from Saline,) in October, 1847, before the Hon. William H. Feild, judge. The plaintiff declared on a writing obligatory executed to him, on the 16th of November, 1841, by R. C. Byrd, as principal, and William J. Byrd, William Field, and defendant’s testator, as securities, for $1,200, due 1st of June, 1843.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank sued Hubbard, declaring that he executed the note sued on, as principal. On oyer craved, a note was filed, executed by another person as principal, and by Hubbard as security. He demurred for the variance. Demurrer sustained, and final judgment for the defendant. The Bank brought error.

This was an action of debt, by petition, tried in the Johnson Circuit Court, in June, 1840, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown', one of the Circuit Judges. It was founded on a bond, executed in June, 1836, bearing interest from date at twelve and a half per cent, per annum. Judgment by default for the debt and damages. The damages are stated, in the record, to have been estimated at twelve and a half per cent., by consent of the parties.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. Debt, by Leech, against Lee, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in May, 1845, before Clendenin, judge.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Washington Circuit Court, in May, 1841, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, one of the Circuit Judges. The facts of the case were precisely like McFarland and others vs. • The Bank of the State, except in one solitary point, mentioned in the opinion.

This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the independence Circuit Court, in June, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. “ The President and Directors of the Branch of the Bank of the State of Arkansas at Batesville, for the use and benefit of said institution,” sued, and writs issued to the counties of Mississippi and Crittenden. Judgment was rendered by default.

This was an appeal from a justice of the peace, determined in the Hempstead Circuit Court, in October, 1841, before the Hon. William Conway B., one of the Circuit Judges. Oliver sued Gray before a justice, on a note. Gray, as the justice’s docket states, appeared and made defence, and filed his account, which was rejected; and Oliver had judgment for the amount of the note and interest, with costs.

This was a judgment on a delivery bond, rendered in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clen-denin, one of the Circuit Judges. This bond was executed for the delivery of property levied on by virtue of an execution, issued on a judgment, obtained in the same Court, by L. & W. 11. Gibson, against Holden Moss and others, which judgment was reversed in this Court, as reported in the case last preceding.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. Judgment by confession, taken in the Pulaski Circuit Court, at the April term,. 1847, before the Hon. William H. Sutton, judge. The transcript shows the following proceedings in the court below: “Proceedings had June 22, A. D. 1847.

This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Pulaski Circuit-Court, in March, 1841, before the Mon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. Randolph sued Ringgold, Owens, Palmer, and McFarland, without any allegation in the declaration as to their respective places of residence, and issued writs to three several counties, each against all of the defendants. McFarland was not served.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank sued Wood Tucker, Sterling H. Tucker, and Richard C. Byrd. A writ issued against Byrd, to Pulaski county, and against the other defendants to Jefferson.

This was an indictment for gaming, tried in the Madison Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, one of the Circuit Judges. Calico and Drake were indicted jointly, for betting with two other persons a glass of whiskey, of the value of fifty cents, at a game of cards, commonly called three-up. Joint plea, not guilty, and verdict of guilty, assessing the fine of each at $10.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clenbenin, one of the Circuit Judges. Held: was not named at all. That the writ does not demand the interest, is only an objection of variance between the declaration and writ, and not to be reached by motion. Didier vs. Galloway, 3 xArk. 501. Besides, the statement as to interest in the declaration was surplusage. Bank vs. Clark, 2 Ark. 375.

Bowels Denning brought an action of assumpsit against Hardy Kelly, to the April term of the Carroll Circuit Court, 1846.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ceendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank sued Elliott, Redman, and James, on a bond, for $560, due at six months from Feb. 13, 1840, without any averment as to their residence. Writ issued to Critten-den county, and was executed on Elliott and Redman.

Writ of Error to Washington Circuit Court. Debt, on a writing obligatory, brought by James Weems, against Aaron Parks and Joel D. Parks, partners under the style of A. & J. D. Parks, and Robert Parks, determined in the Washing Circuit Court, in November, 1848, before Sneed, judge.

<p>Appeal from the Johnson Circuit Court.</p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion of this court.</p> <p>The appellee failed to make an affidavit as required by sec. 88, chap. 4, Digest, wherefore the motion for judgment of non-suit against him ought to have been sustained, lb. sec. 93. Ryan etcd.use, &c. vs. Lemon as ad. 2 Eng. 78.</p> <p>There was no necessity for an affidavit. The action was pending in this court against the intestate at the time of his death, and subsequently revived in the circuit court against the administrator, and ordered to be paid. Digest, chap. 4, sec. 86, 87. If the administrator had any defence, he should have made it in the circuit court; when that court rendered judgment against him, bis rights were precluded, and the probate court was bound to class the claim.</p>

Appeal ftorn the Madison Circuit Court. On the' 12th of April, 1848, John C. Sumner filed a declaration in the Madison Circuit Court, complaining of James Spencer, “ wherefore, he forcibly and unlawfully holds possession of the rbal estate of said plaintiff”; and alleging that, on the 12th clay of November, 1845, he was seized and possessed of a certain tract of land, and that defendant, on said day, forcibly entered upon said real estate, and unlawfully withheld the same…

This was a petition in debt, determined in the Hempstead Circuit Court, in April, 1842, before the Hon. William Conway B., one of the Circuit Judges. Hugh A. Blevins sued on the following instrument of writing: “ Due H. A. Blévins, five hundred and twelve dollars. I have left with him one note on Johnson, for five hundred dollars; one on Gib-bins, for two hundred dollars. He is to collect and pay himself, and pay Blackburn fifty dollars, and settle with Trapnall.

This was an action of Replevin, determined in the Yell Circuit Court, in April, 1842, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. Peevey, the defendant, pleaded, in abatement, that the tax, and issuing fees of the writ, were not paid by the plaintiff, when the writ issued. Demurrer to this plea overruled, and final judgment for defendant.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank sued Lewis, Spurlock, and Cherry, on a note for f 120, and a writ issued to Crittenden county, on which the sheriff returned, that he executed it onLewis and Spurlock, by their acknowledging service of it.

<p>Hinchcliffe moved to dismiss this appeal, for want of a legal affidavit, preliminary to taking the appeal.</p>

Writ of Error to Clark Circuit Ccmrt. Action of unlawful detainer brought by John S. Brinkley, against Lazarus Mooney, in the Clark circuit court, determined at the September term, 1847, before the Hon. C. C. Scott, then judge of the 8th circuit.

Tins was an action of debt, determined in the Jackson Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the lion. Samuel H. Hempstead, Special Judge. Lyon sued Fulcher, on the 19th of September, 1840, on a bond,'dated Sept. 6, 1840, for $927 61, due at 12 months from date, with interest at ten per cent, per annum, after maturity. The breach was silent as to the interest.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Clark Circuit Court, in October, 1841, before the Hon. William Conway B., one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank sued Caruthers, on a note, stated, in the declaration, to be payable at its branch at Washington.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank sued on a bond, stated as payable to “ the Bank of the State of Arkansas, or order.” On oyer craved by Murphree, one of the defendants, a bond was filed, payable to “ the Branch of the Bank of the State of Arkansas at Batesville.” He demurred for the variance, and his denyirrer was sustained.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Jackson Circuit Court, in May, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. Lyon was the plaintiff below, and Fulcher appealed. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court.

At the January term of this court, 1849, Lambert J. Reardon, by S. H. Hempstead, his attorney, presented to this court a petition for supersedeas, accompanied by a transcript showing the proceedings upon which the application was based. The petitioner states, and the transcript shows, that, on the 8th December, 1846, R. C. Byrd, for the use of Taylor, recovered a judgment, in the Pulaski Circuit Court, against Crutchfield and Hempstead.

Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. Laiferty was the plaintiff below.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The Bank sued Bailey, and four others, on a bond. Oyer being granted of the bond, it appeared that a seal was affixed to each name but one. Bailey demurred for variance, on this ground, and the demurrer was 'sustained, and final judgment rendered in favor of Bailey.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. The President and Directors of the Branch of the Bank of the State of Arkansas at Batesville, sued Black-more, Greer, and Hay, on a note executed to the Branch aforesaid, with no rate of interest specified. Hay craved oyer, which was granted. Green filed a plea in abatement, which the Court struck out, on motion of plaintiffs.

On the first day of October, 1846, the Bank of the State of Arkansas, brought an action of debt, in the Washington circuit court, against Elijah B. Alston, John J. Horton, and James Alston, on a promisory note executed by them to the bank, on the 12th day of November, 1842,negotiable and payable six months after date, at the branch of said bank, at Fayetteville.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Jefferson Circuit. Court, in April, 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the Circuit Judges. Prather sued Palmer. An instrument was filed, purporting to be an obltgation for costs, but unsealed. The defendant moved to dismiss the suit, for want of a bond for costs. To establish the non-residence of Prather, the defendant proved that he was a citizen of Indiana seventeen years before.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Jefferson Circuit Court, in April, 1842, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the Circuit Judges. Bennett, Morrill & Co. sued Dardenne on two bonds, each executed to a third person, and' assigned to the plaintiffs. One of the bonds contained the words “witness my hand and seal.” The other did not. The defendant craved oyer, and the original bonds, but not the assignments, were placed upon the record.

This was a proceeding by interpleader in attachment, determined in the Randolph Circuit Court, in April, 1842, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the Circuit Judges. Newland had sued Meeks Neal, and by writ of attachment taken certain property. The record states that Benjamin B. Neal came, by attorney, and claimed the property attached, and moved the Court to be permitted to inter-plead. That leave was granted, and the case continued.

This case was determined in the Crawford Circuit Court, inAugust, 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the Circuit Judges. Bj the1 act of 25th December, 1840, it devolved on the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, Judge of the 4th judicial circuit, to hold the August term, 1841, of the Crawford Circuit Court, in the seventh circuit, of which the Hon. R. C. S. Brown was Judge.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. On the 19th of May, 1847, William E. Woodruff, assignee of E. Claud, sued A. W. Collins and John H. Woodruff, before a justice of the peace of Pulaski county, on two writings obligatory: the 1st, for $70, dated 1st January, 1846, and due at twelve months after date, upon which were endorsed credits of $13 50, March 24th, 1846; $10, April 20th, and $10, May 14th, of the same year; also an assignment to plaintiff dated May 5th, 1847.

This was an rction of assumpsit, tried in the Chicot Circuit Court, in May, 1841. before the Hon. William K. Sebastian, one of the Circuit Judge?. Gray sued Sumner in assumpsit, on the common counts, for the price of two negro children, sold by the former to the latter.

Covenant, by Robinson, against Stone, on a writing obligatory, payable in Arkansas bank paper. The facts are stated by the court. The transcript sent from Jackson county, not being under the seal of the court, could not give the court of Lawrence county any jurisdiction, and it ought to have been dismissed on Stone’s motion. The circuit court of Law-.

This was a case brought into the Pulaski Circuit Court, by certio-rari, and there determined, in March, 1840, before the Hon. Charles Caldwell, one of the circuit judges. Held: in the case of the State vs. Hull, on quo warranto, that the same person could not hold the office of State treasurer and justice of the peace, at the same time.

Clements & Thompson instituted three suits, before a justice of the peace, against Everett, on three several promissory notes, one of which only appears, from the transcript, to have been filed before the issuance of the writ. Everett appeared before the justice, and moved that the three suits be consolidated, which was done.

The plaintiff instituted suit, by attachment, against James Moseley, in the Circuit Court of Jefferson county, before the Hon. Wm. H. Sutton, judge. The writ was levied upon five negroes in the possession of Garland Hardwick, as the property of the defendant, Moseley.

<p>Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court.</p>

<p>Upon petition for an injunction to restrain proceedings at law, affecting real estate, until a decision upon a bill in equity for title to such real estate, if the bill, upon demurrer, be insufficient to sustain a decree, it is error to perpetuate the injunction.</p> <p>The decision of this court in the case of Blakeney vs. Ferguson et al., 3 Eng. 273, concurred in.</p>

The appellant, William L. Miller, presented his bill in chancery at the April term, 1886, of the Lafayette Circuit Court, setting forth that, on the 6th December, 1833, he purchased of Andrew Hemphill, the appellee, a certain improvement, or parcel of land, for $500, to be paid on 1st January, 1835, and for which lie executed his writing obligatory to Hemphill, who executed and delivered to him a deed for the land, being a portion of the unsur-veyed public lands, and gave…

Writ of Error to Sevier Circuit Court. This was an action of detinue for a slave, brought by Wing-field and John Jacobs, minors, by William II. Wingfield, their guardian, against Rice Stringer, and determined in the Hemp-stead Circuit Court, before the Hon. George Conway, then one of the circuit judges.

It is apparent that the contract was dependant, and the purchase money not payable until the delivery of a title to the land, as the notes were to be given up on failure to make title. 20 John. 15. Id. 130. Smith vs. Henry, 2 Eng. 208. The additional agreement, set up in the answer, if in writing, should have been exhibited: if in parol, it was void.

This’ was an action of debt, determined in the Randolph Circuit-Court, in April, 1842, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the-circuit judges. Newland commenced his action, by writ of attachment. The first count in the declaration, was on a promissory note. The second count was for $500, for so much money by Newland laid out and expended for the use of Neale. Neale demurred to the declaration. Demurrer was sustained as to the first count, and overruled as to the second.

This was a bill filed in the Chicot Circuit Court on the chancery side, by Nancy M. Rose, for a divorce from her husband, William W. Rose, and for alimony; and decided by the Hon. William H. Feild, judge.

Tirrs was an action of debí, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1S41, before the Hon. John J. Ctjsndenin, one of the circuit judges. The Bank sued Frazier, Elliott, and Fletcher, and obtained service of process on all. She then discontinued, as to Fletcher, and took judgment against the others by default, who brought error. argued points in the case which are decided and reported in other cases of the present term.

This was an action of debt, commenced by attachment, and determined in Phillips Circuit Court, in June, 1842, before the Hon. John C. P. Tolleson, one of the circuit judges. The Bank sued Mitchell, and took order of publication, in November, 18-11. In May, 1842, after publication made, the defendant moved to dissolve the attachment, for want of a sufficient bond.

This was a proceeding against a garnishee, in attachment, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Ashley sued James Swishelm, in debt, by writ of attachment, and caused his property to be levied on, and caused Dunn to be summoned as a garnishee.

This case was determined in Chicot Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges. The bank sued Watson, in debt. The declaration demanded the sum. of $20,-000. It set out the acts of incorporation of the plaintiff, and of the Grand Gulf Bank, for which it sued.

This was a bill filed in the Independence Circuit Court in Chancery, by Allen D. Ramsey, against the administrator de bonis non of Charles Kelly, and the administrator and heirs of James DeWitt Clinton Kelly, and determined by the Hon. Wm. C. Scott, judge.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Poinsett Circuit Court, in March, 1842, before the Hon. John C. P. Touleson, one of the circuit judges. Buford and others were sued in debt, on a note, payable to the bank, for $320. A summons issued, commanding the defendant to be summoned to appear, “ on the third Monday of our next March term, A. D. 1841, at a court, to be holden on the I5th day of March next.” The summons was served on Buford, alone.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. The bank sued Neely and others, on a bond. The only writ issued was sent to Crittenden county, and there executed. There was no allegation, in the declaration, as to the residence of the defendants. The sheriff, in his return, named the defendants by the initials of their Christian names.

This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Clark Circuit Court, in October, 1841, before the Hon. William Conway B., one of the circuit judges. It is the same case, which is reported as Simpson vs. McDonald, 2 Ark. 370, in which case, the bill of exceptions having, by mistake, stated that the plaintiff, instead of the defendant, had employed other mill-wrights to rebuild the mill, the judgment was reversed, and a new trial awarded.

This was an action of replevin, tried in the Johnson Circuit Court, in September, 1841, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the circuit judges. Goodrich sued for a wagon, which was replevied, and delivered over.

This was an action of assumpsit, tried in the Phillips Circuit Court, in June, 1842, before the Hon. John C. P. Toleeson, one of the circuit judges. The declaration contained three counts. In the first and second, Vann sued Hicks, as the endorser of a bond by a third person, payable to Hicks or order. The first count averred no demand of payment on the obligor, or notice, nor any excuse therefor.

This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in March, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ceendenin, one •of the circuit judges. Laflin, Stevens & Co. sued Woodruff for goods, wares, and merchandise, and for money lent and advanced to, and paid, laid out, and expended for, Woodruff. Woodruff' pleaded non assumpsit, to which issue was joined.

This case was before this court at the January term, 1842. (See 4 Ark. Rep. 292.) Upon its return to the circuit court, it was suggested that Cravens and Wilson had resigned the administration of the estate of Joseph Cravens, and that Wm. W. Floyd had been appointed administrator de horns non of said estate; thereupon, Floyd, as administrator, &c., appeared, and the cause progressed.

This was an appeal from a justice of the peace, tried in the Crawford Circuit Court, in March, 1842, before the Hon. Richard C. S. Brown, one of the circuit judges. Farrington originally sued Bradley, by summons, uin an action on assumpsit.” Bradley pleaded non-as-sumpsit and set off, and Farrington obtained judgment for $>27 21 cents. Bradley appealed. In the circuit court, the account filed by Farrington was simply for 90 bushels of corn, $45.

Tbis was a bill for injunction filed in the circuit court of Benton county, and determined at the May term, 1848.

This was an action of covenant, determined in the Phillips Circuit Court, in November, 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges. Porter sued Josiah S. and William B. McKiel, on a bond,.for the payment of $1,500, in current bank notes of the State of Arkansas. On oyer, it appeared that a seal was attached to the name of one of the defendants only.

This was a bill for injunction, brought by Charles F. Town, against Sebron G. Sneed and Haddock & Hazeltine, and determined before the Hon. William W. Floyd, judge. Upon the hearing of the cause, the facts of which sufficiently appear in the opinion of this court, the circuit court rendered a decree perpetuating the injunction, from which the defendants appealed.

This'was assumpsit, determined in . the Phillips Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. William K. Sebastian, one of the circuit judges. Purdy, as surviving partner of McLaughlin, sued Brown & Taylor on a note, executed by them to Purdy & McLaughlin.

. - This case: came up by petition for a writ of certiorari, to be directed to 'be Washington Circuit Court, where it was determined in May, 1842, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hooe, one of the circuit judges.

This was a bill filed in the circuit court of Jefferson county by Siter, Price & Co., against Antoine Barraque and wife, and others, for title to two fractions of land, alleged to have been purchased by them of said Barraque, with other lands, but omitted in the deed by mistake, and determined by the Hon. William H. Suttoji, judge. The circuit court decreed in favor of the complainants, and the defendants, Barraque and wife, appealed to this court.

' This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, 1840, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. The Bank sued Roswell Beebe, William E. Woodruff, and Peter T. Crutchfield, on a bill of exchange, and the common counts.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. On the 24th of December, 1847, the plaintiffs in error sued out of the Pulaski Circuit Court a writ of garnishment against the State of Arkansas, in substance as follows : “ The State of Arkansas, &c.: [usual caption and address/) Whereas, John McMeekin, D. S. Slaughter, and Thomas W. Hynes, as administrators, with the will annexed, of William R. Hynes, deceased, obtained a judgment in the Pulaski Circuit Court, on the 30th day of…

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Weaver sued Watkins on a bond, executed to Pitcher & Walters, and assigned.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Phillips Circuit Court, in November, 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges. Several questions, decided in this case, have been already reported, in other cases. The Bank sued McPherson, Costar, and others, in Phillips county, and sent out several writs; one of which, to Monroe county, stated that Costar was sheriff of that county, and was directed to the coroner.

Writ of Error to Pulaski Circuit Court. Ejectment, by Joseph Merrill,- against James A. Fears, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, 1846, before the Hon. William H. Feild, judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of this court.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Washington Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, one of the circuit judges.

This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Phillips Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. John C. P. Tolleson, one of the circuit judges. Campbell sued Thomas B. Hanly, and a bond for costs was filed by John Preston, Jr., stating Campbell to be a nonresident.

This was an action of covenant, tried in the Washington Circuit ‘Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. Joseph M. IIoge, one of the 'circuit judges.

This was a proceeding by petition in debt, in the Pulaski Circuit Court, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Held: in Leighton vs. Leighton, Sir. 210, that parol evidence could be given of the condition of records, and the manner of keeping them, but not of the matter of them.. Cook vs. Wood, 1 McCord, 139, only proves that where the records are lost, the journals of the court may be evidence. So with Lyon vs. Gregory, 3 Hen. & Man. 237.

Tms was an action of debt, on a penal bond, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. William Gil-Christ, Special Judge. Elias-N. Conway, as Auditor of Public Accounts, sued Taylor, and Cook, Clemens, Roland, and Cummins, as bis securities, on the bond of Taylor, as sheriff of Pulaski county.

This Was an action of asspmpsit, tried in the Chicot Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges. Hawk sued Walworth, in assumpsit, on a single count, for work and labor. The case was tried by a jury, on the general issue.

- This was a judgment obtained by mere motion, on a delivery bond, in the Chicot Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. William K. Sebastian, one of the circuit judges. The bond was given for the delivery of negroes. The judgment in this case was rendered, on summary motion, on a forfeited delivery bond, under the 40th and 41sf sections of the Revised Statutes, title “Execution.,” p. 380.

This was a case determined in the Chicot Circuit Court, in December, 1841, before the Hon. Wiiliam K. Sebastian, one of the circuit judges. Only one question was presented in this, and many other cases, decided at the present term.

This was an action of debt, tried in the Phillips Circuit Court, iu December, 1841, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges. The Bank sued Josiah S. McKiel and his securities on two notes, one for f> 1800, due at six months from the 19th of December, 1839, and one for $2000, due at six mouths from the 21st day of November, 1839. The defendants pleaded usiuy and the general issue of nil debet, not sworn to.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. The county of Pulaski sued Taylor and his securities on his bondy as sheriff. The declaration charged the officer with having received a certain amount of money, which came to his hands, as sheriff, and which he failec. to pay over according to law.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Phillips Circuit Court, in June, 1842, before the Hon. John C. P. Tolleson, one of the circuit judges.

Tins was an action of covenant, tried in the Crawford Circuit Court, in September, 1841, before fhe lion. R. C. S. Brown, one of the circuit judges. Dennis Trammell sued Isham Harrell upon a bond, executed 7th April, 1839, for the payment, on the l*sl of October, 1839, of $130, in corn, at cash prices.

This was an action of covenant, determined in the Benton Circuit-Court, before the Hon. Joseph M. Hoge, one of the circuit judges. Johnson & Clark sued Mays & Meeks, on bond, conditioned to refund six hundred dollars, which they thereby acknowledged to have received from Johnson & Clark, for.three Lovely donation claims, if said claims were not allowed at the Helena Land-office, by a certain day.

This was an action of assumpsit, determined in tlie Pulaski Circuit Court, in November, 1841, before the Hon. John J. Ciendenin, ono of the circuit judges. James & Woolbridge sued Cummins & Pike, as attorneys, for not paying over moneys collected of one John Mc-Lain, on a debt due from him to the plaintiffs, and on the common counts.

This was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Held: in New-York, to be good matter in bar, but the decisions there are, that, as it can be had .advantage of under the general issue, it cannot be brought forward by special plea. Bank of Auburn vs. Weed, 19 J. R. 300. Contra, S. C., 18 J. R. 137.

Tins was an action of debt, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in May, 1842, before the Hon. William Gilchrist, special judge. Watkins, as administrator, sued McDonald, Hempstead, and Conway, on a common money bond.