Volume 6 — New Hampshire Reports

This was an action of trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s house in Bradford, on the 29th April, 1828, and pulling down the chimney, and tearing off the boards from the roof and sides of the house, whereby the plaintiff was exposed to the weather and much intimidated.

This was an action of trespass, quart clausum fregit, in which, on the trial, at September term, 1831, upon the general issue, a nonsuit was entered, subject to the opinion of the court, upon the following case. William Robinson, being lawfully seized of the locus in quo, on the 11th December, 1826, by deed, conveyed the same to D. C. Atkinson, in fee and in mortgage,* to secure the payment of two promissory notes.

This was an action of trover, for a mare, and was submitted to the decision of the court, upon the following case. The plaintiff, being the owner of the mare, on the 1st February, 1830, let her, for hire, to Dana Brown, for four weeks from that time. On the 6th February, Brown sold and delivered the mure to the defendant.

Assumpsit, for making a highway in the town of Sutton. There were two counts in the declaration ; one a quantum meruit; the other, indebitatus assumpsit, for work and labor- The cause was tried here, at September terns, 1831, upon the general issue. It appeared, that the parties entered into a written contract, in which the plaintiff agreed to make the highway in a particular manner, for which lie was to receive a certain sum, at a day fixed.

Covenant broken. The plaintiff alleged, in his declaration, that Clines, and his said wife, by deed, dated April 1st, ÍS25, conveyed to… Held: of which the defendants claimed to be seized in right of the said Polly ; that the said William and Polly, by the said deed, covenanted with the plaintiff, that they were lawful owners of the premises, that they were seized and possessed, that they had full power and lawful authority to convey, fend that they would warrant the land…

Assumpsit on a note, for §52, dated 4th December, 1824, payable to the plaintiff, or bearer, in sixty days, with interest. The cause was tried here, at May term, 183!, upon the general issue, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff’. It appeared, that sometime before the date of this note, Noyes had signed, as surety for one Walter Wyatt, a note to a hank. A little time bho”c a payment on the m u \-t .t '■ airi.

Case, for diverting the water from the mills of the plaintiff.

TREspass, for killing a mare of the plaintiif. On the trial here, November term, 1831, upon the general issue, the defence was, that the blow, which caused the wound whereof the mare died, was given, by the defendant, in defending himself against an attack made upon him by the mare.

This was a writ of dower, and was tried here, at November term, 1831, and a verdict taken, by consent, for the tenant, subject to the opinion of the court, upon the following* ease. E. Webster, being owner c.f the premises, in which the said Ruth now claims her dower, on the 12th November. 1820. conveyed the same to B. Cass, then the 1ms-hand cf the demandant, in fee ; and, at the same time, the said Ca-s reconvened the same promises to Webster, in fee and in morhguTe.

Assumpsit, upon a note, for $400, dated, August 29, 1825, made, by the defendants, payable to Thomas S. Tillotson, or order, on demand, with interest, and, by him, endorsed to the plaintiff. The defendants pleaded the general issue, and gave notice that they should offer, in evidence, by way of set-off, certain demands against said Tillotson.

This was a writ of entry. The tenant craved oyer oi the writ, which was as follows. “ THE STATE OF NEW-IfAMPSHIEE. Grafton, ss. To the sheriff, &c. We command you to attach the goods or estate of Samuel Sherman, Ac. to the value of fifty dollars, and summon the said Sherman to appear, &c. then and thereto answer to Hamlin Rand, &c. in a plea of land, Sic. He then prayed judgment of the writ, because it was not in the form by law prescribed for a writ, in suelta case.

Assumpsit, upon a note, for ⅛ 100, dated, June 4, 1825, signed by John M, Cooper, Jesse Cooper, and the defendant. whereby they, jointly and severally, promised the plaintiff, to pay him, or order, said sum, in one year, with interest.

Assumpsit. The first count was upon an order, in the following words. Lyman, February 2, 1830. Mn. PETER-PADELFÓRD, Sir. Please to pay, John Child, fifty dollars, and I will account to you for the same, it being for value received. W. NEILSON. There was an alligation, on this count, that the order was presented to Padclford, for payment, which here-fused. There was also a count for money had and received.

Assumpsit, upon a note, dated July 13th, 1829, for $200, made by the defendant and one Stephen Wilson, payable to Levi Barnard, ox order, and, by him, endorsed to the plaintiff. The cause was tried here, upon the general issue, at May term, 1831, and a verdict taken, by consent, for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.

This was an action of debt on a probate bond, given by T. S. Tillotson, as principal, and the other defendants, as sureties, to the Judge of Probate of this county. The defendants craved oyer of the bond and of the condition.

This was an appeal from a decree of ibe Juclue of the Probate in this county. Copp was the executor of the last will and testament of Amos Sawyer, whose estate was administered in the insolvent course.

In this case, the plaintiffs’ counsel had taken, in order to make out his writ, a blank, signed by the clerk of the court of common picas, and intended to he used for a writ to be issued by that court ; but the same person who signed the blank, was clerk of Ibis court at the time the writ of the plaintiffs issued.

This was a petition for partition, in which the petitioner alleged, that he was seized in fee, as a tenant in common with the respondeat, of a tract of land in Salisbury, and prayed that partition might be made. The respondent pleaded that he was sole seized of the premises, and traversed the seizin of the petitioner, and issue was joined upon the traverse.

Assumpsit. The first count was as follows — “ for that the said Greenleaf, at Concord aforesaid, on the 5th January, 1837, by his promissory note, under his hand, of that date, for value received, promised the plaintiff, to pay him two hundred dollars in two years, with interest ; yet &c. The second count was for money had and received. Tiie cause was submitted, to the decision of the court,., upon the foliowing case.

This was an indictment, alleging “ that Jesse Follet, of Concord, &c. on 1st December, 1829, with force and arms, at Concord, in the county of Merrimack aforesaid, unlawfully did sell to one F. E. a part of a ticket; that is to say, one quarter part of a ticket, at and for the price of fifty cents, in a certain lottery not authorized by the legislature of said state, contrary to the form of the statute in such ease made and provided; and against Me peace and dignity of the…

Debt upon a probate bond. The defendant craved oyer of the bond and the condition, and then pleaded performance of the condition. To this the plaintiff replied, and assigned as a breach of the condition of the bond, that the executrix, by whom the bond was given, had not caused an inventory and appraisal of the goods and estate of the testator, to be duly made and returned to the court of probate. To this replication there was a general demurrer, and joinder in demurrer.

Trespass, quart clausum fregit. The cause was tried here, at February terai, 1832, and a verdict returned in favor of the plaintiff, with $3,42 damages. The first count was for breaking and entering, a small close, the title to which was in question on the trial. The second count was for breaking and entering a larger close, which included the close mentioned in the first count.

Covenant Bkoken. The plaintiff alleged, that the defendant, qn the 21th June, 1831, by deed, covenanted with the plaintiff to labor as a journeyman saddle and harness maker, in the plaintiff’s business, for the term of one year from that date.

This was an appeal from a decree of the Judge of Probate, in this county, allowing the account of James Chandler, as administrator of the goods and estate of Gilbert Griswold, deceased. The appeal was taken by some of the heirs of the deceased. The matters in controversy between the parties, may he seen in the report of this case, 5 N. H. Reports 492.

This was an action of trespass for assaulting and imprisoning the plaintiff.

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Hanover, in this county, and was tried upon the general issue, at May term, 1832, when it appeared in evidence, that one Benjamin Webster, being lawfully seized of the demanded premises, and being in debt and in embarrassed circumstances, on the 17th September, 1816, conveyed the same to one Silas Chandler.

This was an action upon the case. The plaintiff alleged, in his declaration, that, having obtained an execution against William McDearmid, he, on the 23d February, 1830, delivered the same to the defendant, a deputy sheriff, and on the 6th April, 1830, directed the defendant to levy the same on the right which the said Mc-Dearmid had to redeem certain lands in Thornton and Peeling ; in pursuance of which direction the defendant levied the said execution on said right in…

Information, in the nature of a quo warranto, filed by the direction of the legislature ; alleging, that Mills 01-cott, William Harris, Edward Tucker man, and Thomas P. Cushing, for the term of ten years, last past, have used and still do use, without any warrant, or lawful authority, the following liberties, privileges and franchises, to wit, to demand, exact, and receive, of and from all persons passing upon and along Connecticut river, and through the locks and canals, at…

These actions were both referred to arbitrators, at November term, 1830. At May term, 1831, the arbitrators made reports, by which they awarded to the plaintiff, in the action Holt v. Quimby, $14,19, damages, and costs, taxed at $71,43 ; and to the defendant, in the other action, costs, taxed at $43,63.

Assumpsit, apon a note, for $150, dated June 7th, 1825, payable, to the plaintiff, in three years, with interest, and made by the defendants. The cause was tried here, upon the general issue, at May term. 183!, when the note was produced, and the signature of the defendants proved.

It appeared, in this ease, from the disclosure of the trustee, that, on the 13th February, 1832, Sayward, the principal debtor, by a deed of assignment, conveyed to the trustee, all his stock in trade, in trust, to sell and dispose of the same within the term of three months, and out of the proceeds to pay— 1. The expenses attending the trust. 2.

This was an application for a divorce. The alleged cause was, that the husband had willingly absented himself from the wife for the space of three years together, without making suitable provision for her support, having it in his power so to do.

Debt opon abend, dated 6th April, 1830, given to the plaintiffs, John Horn, Joshua Fiifber and Daniel Na-son, “ selectmen of Sornersworth,” and to be paid to them, or their successors in office, for “ the use of the said town of Sornersworth.” The bond was signed by W. D. Smith, as principal, and N. Martin, J. Whittier, J. Martin and C. Bartlett as sureties.

Assumpsit. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants, on the 24th November, 1824, were owners of the schooner Napoleon ; that they shipped on board the same at Gloucester, for Philadelphia, 118 barrels, and 29 half barrels of mackerel, to be delivered at Philadelphia, which were never delivered. The cause was tried at January term, 1831, upon the general issue, and a verdict taken, by consent, for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.

This was an action on the case, for falsely representing Josiah Hobbs, Junior, to be a man of credit, whereby the plaintiff was induced to trust him and lost a sum of money. The cause was tried here, at January term, 1832, upon the general issue.

This was a writ of error, brought to reverse a judgment of the court of common pleas. Hodge brought an action of assumpsit, for money had and received, against Hoit. Upon the trial, in the court of common pleas, it appeared, that Hodge, and one David Bunker, at Barnstead, on the 2d August, 18,30, made a bet of $5 each, upon a horse race, to be run at Barn-stead, on the 7th August, 1830. The money was deposited in the hands of Hoit.

Assumpsit upon a note, made by the testator, dated, November 16, 1825, for £100, payable to the plaintiff, or order, on demand with interest. The cause was tried, upon the general issue, at January term, 1832, when it appeared that the testator made the note, but it did not appear that the note had been exhibited to the defendant, the executor, previous to the commencement of this action.

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Gilmanton. The cause was tried, upon the general issue, at August term, ¡832, when it appeared in evidence that the demandant was the owner of lot, No. 7, in the third range of lots in Gilmanton, and the tenant owner of the adjoining lot, No. 9, in the fourth range of lots. The demanded premises were, a tract of land lying near the line between the said lots.

This was a petition for partition, in which, the petitioners alleged, that T. II. Miller was seized of one undivided fourth part, and J. Pickering and wife, in her right, of another fourth part undivided, of certain lands in Newington, ns tenants in common. with persons to them unknown, ami they prayed that partition might be made. The cense was submitted to the decision of the court, upon the lohowina- facts.

Joins* Alle.u v*&> acrrunistrator of Samuel Marble, deceased. and. on the 13th Apri.. 182*. his account, as administrator. tras showed by the Judge of probate, and a balance ot ⅛got,21. found due *o the administrator Bryant appealed from the decree of the Judge of probate, allowing the said account, and to show his right to appeal, he relied upon the following circumstances.

Assumpsit, upon a note, for $21,45, dated, August 2, 1813, made by the defendant, and payable to the plaintiffs, on demand with interest. The suit was commenced on the 29th June, 1830. The defendant pleaded in bar, that the cause of action did not accrue at any time within six years next before the commencement of the suit.

This was an action of assumpsit, in which the plaintiff alleged, that, on the 27th November, 1802, one E. Pickering, being seized of certain real estate, made his will and devised certain lands to the defendant and E. P-, provided the defendant should pay the plaintiff, annually, from the decease of the testator, the sum of twenty dollars, during her life ; that the testator died, on the 12th January, 1803 ; and afterwards the will was proved, and the defendant accepted the…

Assumpsit. One count was upon a note, for $3200, dated March 7, 1803, and payable to the bank in sixty days, with interest after. Held: consistently with the decisions already made, that this case is taken out of the statute. A surety, in general, stands on the same ground as the principal. There may be cases, which may be deemed hard cases for the surety. But the surety is commonly the effective and responsible man.

Tins was a complaint, filed at August term, 1831, in which it was alleged, that the said Choate, on the 18th March, 1831, commenced an action of trespass, quare clausum fregit, against Carlton, and one John McNiel ; that the writ was returnable at the said August term ; and that the said Choate had neglected to enter the said action ; whereupon the said Carlton prayed judgment for his costs.

Debt, upon a probate bond. It was alleged, in the declaration, that the testator, on the 19th May, 1814, by his writing obligatory, of that date, &e., acknowledged himself to be indebted to the plaintiff, in the sum of $50,000, to be paid to the plaintiff on demand ; yet the said testator never paid the said sum to the plaintiff, nor have the defendants paid said sum since the decease of the testator, but neglect so to do.

Debt upon a bond, dated, February 18, 1809. Rogers was defaulted. Gilman craved oyer of the bond, and the condition, which was in substance, that Rogers, laving been appointed cashier of the Bank, should faith-folly discharge the duties of said office, and account to. the president and directors, when requested, for ail eys and other property belonging to the corporation and entrusted to him. He then pleaded a general performance of the condition by Rogers.

Case. The plaintiff alleged, in his declaration, that, ut the January term of the common pleas in this county, 1829, he recovered judgment against B. R. Rolin, for the sum of $235, damages, and $27,69 costs of suit; that he sued out execution on his said judgment, and delivered the same to a deputy sheriff, who, by virtue thereof, arrested the said Rolin, and on the 28th January, 1829, committed him to prison, in Exeter, and to the custody of the defendant, then keeper of…

Case, for damages sustained by the plaintiff, in falling, with his horses and waggon, through a bridge which the defendants were bound to keep in repair — which damages were alleged to have happened through want of repair in the bridge. The cause was tried at October term, 1832, upon the general issue.

Covenant beoken, upon an instrument, in the following words. “ This agreement, made this 15th day of December, 1818, by and between Charles Douglas, and Charles Douglas, attorney for Jesse Farnum, of the first part; and John B. Oldham, of the second part, witness-eth, that the said party, of the first part, hath, this day, agreed to sell unto the said party of the second part,— the following described tract of land situated in Franklin, No. 3, and in Connecticut Western…

Thespass for breaking open the turnpike gate. The cause was tried, upon the general issue, at January term, 1832, in the court of common pleas. The plaintiffs produced a charter, granted June 17, 1802, constituting them a corporation, and authorizing them to make, and keep in repair, a turnpike road, not Jess than four rods wide.

This was a writ of entry) brought to recover a tract oi land in Surry, and was tried here, upon the general issue, at October term, 1832, and a verdict taken for the demandants subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case. It was agreed, that one Elijah Fuller was once the owner of the premises.

Assumpsit. It was alleged, in the declaration, that the defendant, on 31st January, 1828, for value received, promised to pay the plaintiff', .887,50, in good leather, such as would suit the plaintiff, on demand, at Mr Slade’s tan-yard, in Walpole, with interest.

Debt upon a bond, in the sum of ⅜⅜10,000, which was described in the declaration as payable to the town “ as said town should, by legal vote, direct.” The defendants craved oyer of the writ, and of the sheriff’s return, by which it appeared that he attached property of the defendants and left a summons, with cash, for his appearance.

Debt, upon a bond. The defendant craved oyer of the bond and of the condition, which was, in substance, that the defendant should “ abide by and perform” the award and determination of H. C. E. B. and J. H. mutually chosen to establish a division line between the lands of the parties, and assess and determine what sum, or sums of money, either of the parties should pay to the other for all trespass, rents and profits done and had.

Assompsit on a note, in these words, “ January 27, 1825, For and in consideration that a fund of one thousand dollars, or upwards, be raised for the support of the ministry, in the congregational society in Troy, I promise to pay said society, in part of the fund, fifty dollars, on demand, with interest, to be paid annually. C. PERRY.” Theaetion was commenced on the 16th March 1832,and was tried here, upon the general issue, at April term, 1833.

Assumpsit, for the support of Betsey Fife, a pauper, alleged to have her settlement in the town of Troy. The cause was tried, on the general issue, at October Term, 1832, and a verdict returned for the plaintiffs, which was taken subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.

This was a prosecution commenced by Aaron Wright as clerk of the first company, twentieth regiment of N. H. Militia, to recover, of the respondent, a fine of $2,00 for disobedience of orders, of his commanding officer, at a company training, on the 4th day of September, A. D. 1833.

Trespass, guare clausum j'regii. Plea, general issue. The action was tried at the common pleas sitting in April. In order to maintain the defence the defendant attempted to show that he had been in the peaceable possession of the locus in quo for more than t wenty years next preceding the commencement of the suit.

Debt upon a bond. The defendant craved oyer of the bond, and also of the condition, which was as follows. “ The condition of this obligation is such, that if the above bound C..Wilcox shall, well and truly, stand to, obey, perform, fulfil and keep the [award, order, arbitrament and final determination of E. S., J. H. and R. S. elected and named to arbitrate and award, order, judge and determine of and concerning all, and all manner of, actions, suits, bills, bonds,…

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Alexandria, which the demandants claimed to hold by virtue of their charter, which was dated, February 6, 1769, The tenant claimed to hold the land by virtue of a deed, made by Samuel Cole, collector of taxes for the town of Alexandria, in the year 1822, who sold the land to Moses George, to pay taxes assessed upon it that year.

This was a writ of entry brought to recover lot No. 29, in the fourth sale in Bethlehem.

This was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering a school house of the plaintiffs, and taking and carrying away the windows. The cause was tried at November term, 1-832, upon the general issue, when the plaintiffs proved, that they had acted as a school district, and had been in possession of the school house for many years, and that the defendant entered the school house and took away the windows.

This was an action of debt, brought by the plaintiff, who sued, as well for the county of Grafton as for herself, to recover a penalty, alleged to have been incurred by the defendant, in taking illegal interest apon a loan of money. The defendant, at November term., 1831, pleaded in bar a release of the action, made by the plaintiff since the commencement of the suit, to wit, on the 20th October, 1831. To this plea there was a general demurrer, and join-der in demurrer.

This was an action of assumpsit for the price of a coffin, and was tried here, «pon the general issue, at May term, 1832 ; when it appeared, that, upon the decease of Joseph Tilden, the father of the defendant, Joel Tilden^ applied to the plaintiff to make the coffin, but said nothing about the payment, or the price ; that the plaintiff made, and delivered the coffin ; and that the defendant was afterwardsduly appointed administrator of the estate of the deceased and…

This was an action of assumpsit, upon a promissory note, brought by Elizabeth Burley, against Gordon Bur-ey,in which judgment was rendered in favor of the origi-inal plaintiff, on the verdict of a jury, Gordon Burley sued out this writ of review, which he entered here, at May term, 1831, and, at November term, in the same year, he pleaded puis darrein continuance, in bar of the original action, a release,Anade on the 20th October, 1831, of all claims, demands,factions and…

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Haverhill, containing about five acres, being the west end of house lot number 16, in horse meadow.

Assumpsit on a promissory note, dated October 1, 1825, for $150, made by the defendant, and one Kimball Blood. The cause was tried upon the general issue, at November term, 1832, when it was admitted, that the defendant and Blood made the note, but the defendant, who was only a surety, insisted that Blood, the principal, had paid the note by keeping sheep for the plaintiff.

Tins was a writ of error brought to reverse a judgment of the court of common pleas. Little brought an action of trespass against Corv, for taking and leading away Little’s brown mare, and turning her into a certain wood lot, and causing her to stray áway. The cause was tried upon the general issue in the court below, when it appeared that Little and Cory had each a close, with a close of a third person between them. The distance between their two closes was about fifty rods.

This was a writ of error brought to reverse a judgment of the court of common pleas.

This was a writ of error brought to reverse a judgment of the court of common pleas in this county. It appeared by the record of the judgment and proceedings in the court below, that Hadduck brought an action, against J, P. and Caleb Foster, and another, his trustees. The officer who served the original writ made a return of his doings as follows “ State of New Hampshire, Grafton, ss.

The cause was submitted to the decision of the court upon the following facts. Jonathan Eaton, of Hanover, sued out a writ against A. Miner, the plaintiff in this case, upon the back of which, near the bottom, W. Smith, the defendant, put an endorsement os follows ; — “ Jonathan Eaton, by his attorney, W. Smith.” At November term of the superior court in this county, 1831, Miner recovered judgment in that suit against Eaton, for $¡39 27 costs of suit.

This was an action of covenant broken. The plaintiff’ alleged, in his declaration, that on the 20th February, 1823, the defendant, by deed, conveyed to one A. Bo-honon, a certain tract of land in Washington, in the state of Vermont, and by the same deed covenanted with the said Bohonon, his heirs and assigns, that he, the defendant, would warrant the same land to the said Bohonon against the lawful claims of any person claiming by, from, or under him.

Assumpsit upon a promissory note, dated April 23, 1831, for $25.

This was an action of trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close, in Lyme, on the 1st of April, 1829, and on clivers other clays between that time, and the 1st of May Í831. The defendant among other things, pleaded that he entered the close under a license from the plaintiff, and issue was joined upon the license.

Assumpsit upon an account annexed to the writ, containing sundry items of charges, at different times, between June 1817, and May 1825 ; and divers items of credit between October 1818, and December 1826. The writ was dated December 13, 1830.

This was an action of trover for a cow, two sheep, and a lamb. The cause was tried upon the general issue at may term, 1832. . It appeared that the cow, sheep and lamb, were the property of the plaintiff, in October, 1827, when Daniel Doty, her father, without any authority, sold them to G, and E. Á. Webb, who sent and took them and put them in to the hands of the defendant to keep for them.

Petition for partition. The petitioner alleged that she was seized of three undivided fourth parts of a certain tract of land in Haverhill, in this county, as tenant in common with the respondent, and prayed that partition might be made. The petitioner attempted to derive her title from one Nicholas Dorian.

Debt upon bond. The defendants were summoned to answer to “ the judge of probate for the county of Grafton,” and the declaration alleged, that, by the writing obligatory they became bound to the judge of probate, &e. The name of Thomas Eastman, of Enfield, was endorsed upon the writ, as the person at whose request the suit was instituted. The declaration contained no profert.

Trespass for taking a cow at Colebrook on the 2d October, 1828. The defendant pleaded in bar, that, being a deputy sheriff, and having an execution against the plaintiff, he took the cow and sold her to satisfy the execution. The plaintiff replied, that he was, at the time of the taking, a resident at Colebrook, in this county, and that the cow was his only cow.

Assumpsit on an award made under a parol submission. On the trial'of thé cause upon the general issue, at September term, 1SS2, in the court of common pleas, it appeared in evidence, that the parties had certain claims against each other, which had been reduced to writing, and which they agreed to submit to the determination of three arbitrators.

Assumpsit on a written contract as follows : — The said Dow agrees to sell to said Fairbanks his farm, in Strat-ford, for the sum of $250, to be paid one third yearly from this date, with interest annually ; and the said Fairbanks agrees to the same. The crops on the farm this year to be reserved to the said Dow, and any agreement made by J. S., agent for said Dow, to take care and rent said farm, to be reserved to said Dow and to be fulfilled. MOSES DOW, SAMUEL FAIRBANKS.

This was an action of trespass, in which the plaintiff alleged that the defendants, at Columbia, on the 19th January, 1829, with force and arms, made an assault upon Mm and beat him. Samuel Thomas, one of the defendants, having prayed oyer of the writ, and the officer’s return upon it, by which it appeared' that his property had been attached, and a summons left for his appearance, prayed that the summons might be enrolled.

This was a writ of entry brought to recover a tract of land in Colebrook. The cause was tried in the court of common pleas, at May term, 1833, upon the general issue, when it appeared in evidence,that one John Smith,was in possession of the demanded premises in the year 1816, and remained in possession until the time of the extent hereinafter mentioned.

This was an action of trespass quart clausum fregit. The locus in quo, described in the declaration, was the township of Cambridge, in this county. The cause was tried here at May term, 1830, and a verdict taken by consent for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.

This was an action on the case for slander. Among other counts there was one, in,which it was alleged that the defendant, in a certain discourse, which he had with divers persons, of and concerning the plaintiff, falsely and maliciously charged the plaintiff with the crime of theft, But the words uttered by the defendant were not, set out in this count.

Debt upon a probate bond, given by Thomas S, Til-iotson, administrator of the goods and estate of John Mb Tiliotson.

Assumpsit for the use and occupation of a house and 'two acres of land in Stratham, from the 5th November, 1828, to the 2d April, 1830. The cause was submitted to the decision of the court upon the following facts. The plaintiff, having brought a writ of entry against the defendant to recover possession of the said house and land prevailed in the suit, and at August term of the court of common pleas in this county, 1828, judgment veas entered in his favor as upon a mortgage.

Assumpsit for the use and occupation of a certain house and land, in Portsmouth, from the 16th September, 1829, to the S7tii October, 1830. The cause was submitted to the decision of the court upon the following case.

Assumpsit for the support of William McDaniel and John Hill, two paupers, alleged to have their settlement in the town of Barrington. The cause was triedjjpon the general issue, in the court of common pleas, at March term, 1833, in this county, and a verdict taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.

This was a writ of entry brought to recover a tract of land in Chester, and was tried upon the general issue, at the last August term of the common pleas, in this county, and a verdict taken, by consent, for the [demandant, subject to the opinion of this court upon the following case. John Coffin was seized, in fee, of the demanded premises, before, and at the time of the extent, hereafter mentioned.

This was a writ of entry brought to recover a tract of land in Chester, and was tried upon the general issue in the common pleas, at March term, 1833, and a verdict taken, by consent, for the demandants, subject to the opinion of this court upon the following case. One Jeremiah Rand, being seized of the demanded premises, on the 11th February, 1819, by deed, conveyed the same to the demandants.

This was a writ of error brought to reverse a judgment of the court of common pleas in this county.

The defence being that the testator was not of sound and disposing mind, an issue, formed for the purpose of trying that question, came before the jury, August term, 1832, when it appeared that on the 30th of December, 1816, said David Hamblett, deceased, executed the instrument in question, and died on the 4th of January-following.

Indictment for perjury, alleged to have been, committed at Plaistow, in the county of Rockingham, before Benjamin George, Esq. a justice of the peace, on the the 21st January, 1830, in swearing that a certain complaint, made by said Hascall, against one Cyrus Fitts, for the purpose of obtaining sureties to keep the peace, was true.

Assumpsit by the plaintiff as endorsee, upon an. instrument, in these words, “ Oct. 19, 1880. Good to Robert Cochran, or order, for thirty dollars, borrowed money. JOSEPH W. MARCH.” The case was submitted to the decision of the court, upon the following facts, reported by an auditor.

Assumpsit upon a promissory note of the defendant, dated April 24, 1819, for ,$219, in one year from the 20th of August then next. Pleas, general issue, and statute of limitations.

Trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close in Sandown.

Debt upon bond, the condition of which was that Hutchins and Knight, two of the obligors, prisoners in the gaol at Exeter, at the suit of the plaintiff, should continue true prisoners, within the limits, until lawfully discharged.

Assumpsit. The canse came before the court on an appeal from the decree of the judge of probate, allowing the private claim of Copp, against the estate of Amos Sawyer, he being executor of said Amos Sawyer’s last will.

Trespass for mesne profits. The cause was tried, upon the genera! issue, at January term, 1833, when the plaintiff, to maintain the issue, on bis part, gave, in evidence to the jury, a judgment, recovered by him, in August, 1830, against the defendant, in a writ of entry, for seizin and possession of the close described, in the declaration, in this case ; but he showed no writ of seizin, executed, nor any entry by him, after the judgment. objected, that an action of trespass…

TRover, for a cow, and ten tons of hay. The cause was tried at January term, 1833, upon the general issue, and a verdict returned in favor of the defendant, which, was taken, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.

Debt upon a probate bond, with condition, that Polly Wormwood, executrix of the last will of V. Wormwood, should pay all the debts and legacies of the deceased. The defendants pleaded performance of the condition of the bond. The plaintiff, in his replication, alleged a refusal by the said Polly to pay a certain debt of the deceased.

Tins was a writ of error, brought to reverse a judgment of the Coorí of Common Pleas, rendered upon the disclosure of the trustee. The trustee, in his answers to the interrogatories put to him, stated, in substance, that sometime in the year 1826, he contracted with the principal, to sell and convey to the latter a tract of land, for $450, and gave to tli e principal a bond to convey the land, upon payment of that sum in four years.

This was an action of assumpsit. The trustee appeared, and in his disclosure, stated, that, on the 14 May, 1830, he was duly appointed guardian of Knight, the principal, who is an insane person, and that he had in his hands, as guardian, property of the principal.

Assumpsit by the plaintiff, as endorsee of a promissory note. The writ was dated March 19, 1830. At the trial, August term, 1832, the plaintiff offered in evidence a note, underneath which was an agreement, copies of which note and agreement are as follows : “July 1, 1829, For value received, 1 promise to pay Thomas Hoit, or order, one hundred eight dollars, twenty-nine cents, on demand with interest.

Case against the defendant as former sheriff of this county, for the default of Charles Bean, a deputy.

Partridge, disallowing the claim made by Dyer against said estate. The appeal was taken on the 17th June, 1833, and being entered at this term, a motion was now made by the counsel for the appellee, that the appeal be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Case for slander. The words set out In the declaration were, “ that old thievish Moses Lamos stole my pork, which I had in my barn, for I tracked him.” The action was tried in the common pleas, January term, 1833, upon the general issue, when the defendant, with a view of reducing the damages, proposed to en-quire into the plaintiff’s general character as a virtuous and honest man, or otherwise.

Assumpsit. The plaintiff had entered a nolle prosequi as to Bickford. And after a verdict returned in favor of the plaintiff against Pecker, I. Bartlett moved the court to arrest the judgment, because it did not appear by the record that Bickford had interposed any defence that could warrant a nolle prosequi as to him.

This was a writ of entry brought to recover a tract of land in Hooksett. The demandant alleged, in his count, that the tenant, being sezied of the demanded premises on the 19th March, 1827, by deed, conveyed the same to the demandant in fee and in mortgage.

This was a writ of entry wherein the plaintiff demanded seizin and possession of one acre and one half acre of land situate in Boscawen which he describes by metes and bounds.

This was a writ of entry in which the demanded premises were described as follows : — “ A certain tract of land situated in said Boscawen, being all that part of the homestead farm of the late Nathaniel Gookin, of said B. which was conveyed to Joseph Elliot, by P. Gookin, administrator of the goods and estate of said Nathaniel, except what has been conveyed by said Joseph Elliot, to Joseph Couch, by deed, dated February 1, 1827.

This was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering the close of the plaintiffs, in Warner, and cutting and carrying away forty pine trees. The cause was tried at February term, of the common pleas, 1833, and a verdict taken for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of this court, upon the following case.

Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The cause was tried in the common pleas, at September term, 1833, and a verdict taken for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of this court, on the following case. The goods mentioned in the declaration were sold, and delivered to the defendants by the plaintiffs, but at the time of the sale Erastus Wilkins was an infant, under the age of twenty-one years.

This was an action of assumpsit upon a promissory note. The defendant having craved oyer of the writ, &e. and enrolled the summons left with him in the service of the writ, filed a plea in abatement as follows :— The said Brown prays judgment of the writ aforesaid and that the same may abate, because he says that the summons does not briefly give the same information to the defendant which the declaration gives more at large in that the note in the declaration set forth is…

Complaint by Benjamin Doe, as clerk of the company of infantry, in Pembroke, commanded by Aaron Whitte-more, jr. setting forth, that the respondent being a private in said company, and having been duly notified to meet with the company on the seventh day of May, A. D. 1833, did unnecessarily neglect to appear. The cause came to the court of common pleas on appeal from the decision of a justice of the peace, and was tried at the September term.

Assumpsit upon two promissory notes payable to J. A. Low, or order, and endorsed. The cause was tried in the common pleas, September term, 1833, upon the general issue, when the defendant attempted to prove that said notes were given for lottery tickets, and having called the plaintiff’s attorney as a witness, proposed to him two questions. 1. Were these notes endorsed, when they were put into your hands for collection ? 2.

Trespass. Upon the trial, at the court of common pleas, September term, 1833, the plaintiff, to prove that the goods in question were his property, offered in evidence a deposition, purporting to have been taken in Madison county, in the State of New York, before Stephen Chapman, a justice of the peace, to the admission of which the defendant objected, alleging that there was no sufficient evidence that Chapman, before whom it was taken, was a justice.

Trespass for taking the plaintiff’s horse. The suit was commenced on the 16th December, 1831.

This was an action of debt upon a bond, the condition of which was, that Tenney should faithfully perform the duty of collector of taxes in Hudson for the year 1829.

This was an action of trespass, qucm clausum fregit.— The defendants pleaded severally ; and a verdict having been returned in their favor, at September term, 1832, B. M. Farley, their counsel, moved the court to allow the defendants their costs severally.

This was an action of trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff's close in Manchester, in this county. The cause was submitted to the decision of the court upon the following facts. The defendant sued out a writ against one Patten Hall who was seized of the locus in quo, and by virtue of the same writ caused the locus in quo to be attached.

This was an action to recover the sum of $43, for the support of Barnard Turner, a pauper, alleged to have a settlement in Jaflrey. The evidence offered to fix his settlement there, was, that Thomas Turner, the father, on whose settlement that of the son depended, owned real estate, situate in the town of Jaflrey, of the value of $150, for the term of four years, on which he resided during said time, and paid all the taxes.

Trover for two steers. There were two counts in the declaration. Both counts alleged that the intestate, being possessed of the steers, lost them, hut in one count the conversion was alleged to have been in the life time of the intestate, and in the other count to have been after his decease, and, for an alleged misjoinder in these counts, the defendants moved for an arrest of judgment.

Assumpsit on a note for $27,27, made by the defendant, dated October 31, 1831, payable to one T. Chandler, or order, and by him endorsed to the plaintiff. Upon the trial of the cause at October term, 1833, it appeared, that the defendant made the note, and that it was endorsed to the plaintiff for a valuable consideration on the 15th March 1832.

This was assumpsit, founded on a note, made by the defendant, and one Taft, for $46,00 drawn, payable to the plaintiff or his order, in two years and six months from its date, with interest.

Assumpsit for work and labour, performed by the plaintiff, in the service of the defendant, from March 9th, 1831, to December 27, 1831. The declaration contained the common counts, and among them a count in quantum meruit, for the labor, averring it to be worth one hundred dollars. At the trial in the C. C. Pleas, the plaintiff proved the performance of the labor as set forth in the declaration.

Debt upon a judgment rendered by a justice of the peace in the county of Windsor, Vermont, on the 1st March, 1833, for $44,19, damage, and $1,48, costs. Winchester was described in the writ as of Woodstock, Vermont, and the plaintiff as of the same place- But Comings, was described as of Cornish, in this county.

; Assumpsit to recover certain tolls, alleged to be due .from the defendant, for passing over the plaintiffs’ turnpike road.

Assumpsit upon a promissory note signed by one San-born and the defendant, dated November 18, 1829, payable to one Hardy or bearer in one year from date with interest. Upon the trial in the Common Pleas, May term, 1834, it appeared that the defendant was in fact surety for said Sanborn.

Assumpsit upon an account annexed to the writ, tried in the court of Common Pleas, May term, 1834. At a former term the case was committed to an auditor, and on the hearing before him, the plain tiff, by request of the defendant, was examined as a witness in chief, and his testimony, together with t hat of (lie other witnesses, was fully reported with the result at which the auditor had arrived from the testimony thus submitted to him.

Assumpsit upon a written contractas follows :— Rumney, January 18, 1822. Agreeably to my father’s last will, I promise to pay James Horn, forty dollars, when he shall arrive at the age of twenty-one years. John Fuller, Asa Fuller. The cause was tried upon the general issue at November term, 1832, when it was admitted that the defendant made the contract, and that the plaintiff arrived at the age of twenty-one years before this action was commenced.

Trespass, quare clausum fregit. The close described in the declaration was in Bath. The cause was tried at the sittings of the court of Common Pleas, in September, 1833, and a verdict taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of this court on the following case. One Samuel Hadlock being seized of the locus in quo, on the 18th August, 1817, by deed, conveyed the same to Thomas Hall.

Assumpsit on a note, for $692, dated 25th April, 1832, made by the defendant, and payable to Isaac Dole, or order, on demand with interest, and by Dole endorsed to the plaintiff.

This was a writ of error, on a judgment of the court of Common Pleas, The action was assumpsit upon an account annexed to the writ, brought by Davis against Jewett.

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Bath, in this county. The cause was tried upon the general issue, at May term, 1833. It appeared in evidence, that L. Pulsifer and H. Wells, being- seized of the demanded premises, on 23d September, 1812, by deed, conveyed the same to Joseph tifield, in fee. This deed was recorded January 18, 1814. On the 18th August, 1826, Fifield, by deed, conveyed the same premises to the demandant.

Debt, upon a judgment of the Court of Sessions in this county, rendered against the town, at September term, 1823, in favor of the plaintiff, for $75, being the damage by him sustained, by reason of a highway laid out through his land, upon a petition to the said court. The town pleaded, among other things, nil debet, upon which, issue was joined.

Trespass quare clausum fregit. The close described in the declaration was lot No. 3, in the nineteenth range, in the Township of Concord, which is now the town of Lisbon in this county. The cause was tried upon the general issue, at November term, 1833, The plain tiffs gave in evidence to the jury a copy of the charter of Concord, dated August 6, 1763, and proved an entry by the defendants into the lot described in the declaration.

This was an indictment, and the offence was alleged as follows.

This was an indictment, and the offence was alleged as follows.

This was assumpsit upon a note, dated, August 19th, 1834, for 855,00, made by flic defendant, and drawn payable to the plaintiff, or Isis order, on demand, and interest. Upon the trial, at May term, 1833, the making of the note was admitted. The defence was payment, and the defendant gave in evidence the deposition of Francis-Wilson, which is made a part of this case.

This was an action of assumpsit. There were three counts in the plaintiff’s declaration. The first count alleged that the defendant received of the plaintiffs the sum of $114, to be delivered by him to one Daniel Oolt within three days, and that the defendant so negligently, and carelessly conducted with said money that the same became wholly lost to the plaintiffs.

Error. brought to reverse a judgment rendered in the* Superior Court, in this County, Nov. term, 1832, against the plaintiffs’ Susan Whitmore, and Henry Frary, in am action of trespass, brought against them by the defendant in error. Judgment was rendered in the original actionr against the two defendants, by agreement of the attorney' who appeared for them in that suit.

Assumpsit, upon a parol award By the report of an auditor, to whom the case was committed, it appeared that the plaintiff and defendant had been in partnership in the profits and proceeds of certain mills, and a farm in Lisbon, which partnership commenced in February, 1827, and that the partnership concerns had never been finally settled.

This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a shop on a lot of land in Colcbrook ; and was tried, upon the general issue, at November term, 1833, and a verdict taken for the tenants, subject to the opinion of this court upon the following case. George Aldrich was once seized of the lot on which the shop demanded, stood, and while he was so seized, W. Forham, with his leave and license, built the shop upon the lot.

Assumpsit, for $100, money had and received. The defendant pleaded the statute of limitations. To this the plaintiffs replied, that, at the time when the cause of action accrued, and ever afterwards, the defendant resided in Vermont, and did not leave property in litis state that could be attached. To this the defendant rejoined, that he left property within the stale, which might have been attached, and upon this issue was joined.

Debt upon a bond, dated January 19th, 1813, made by Benjamin Boardman, as principal, and S. A. Pearson and others as sureties, and payable to Nathaniel Gilman, then treasurer of the state, and his successors in that office.

Assumpsit on a note, for ⅜36 50, dated, March 20, 1823, made by the defendant, and payable to the intestate, in ten months, with interest. The defendant pleaded the general issue and the statute of limitations. Upon the trial, at November term, 1833, the plaintiff proved that the subscribing witness to the note was out of the stale, and then offered evidence of the hand writing of the defendant.

Debt upon a judgment rendered by a justice of the peace, in the State of Vermont. Plea, nil debet. On the trial at the Common Pleas, May term, 1834, the plaintiff pioduced, what purported to be, a copy of the judgment described in the declaration, certified as a true copy by the clerk of the county court. The defendant objected to the admission of this evidence without farther proof to authenticate the paper, but the court overruled the objection.

Foreign attachment. From the disclosure of the trustee in this case, it appeared that in October, 1828, he purchased of James Doughty, the principal debtor, a farm in Randolph, and some personal property, for the sum of two hundred dollars, and gave him several notes for neat stock, to be delivered at different periods, the last falling due in 1832 ; which notes at the request of said Janies were made payable to Jonas S. Doughty, or order, at a place in Gilead, in the State…