¶1delivered the opinion of the Court.
¶2Cases within the reason, but not within the words, of the statute of limitations, are not barred. Bedell v. Jenney, 4 Gil. 193.
¶3In order to take a case out of the statute of limitations, there must be a promise to pay the debt, but such promise may be implied from an unqualified admission that the debt is due and unpaid. Ayers v. Richards, 12 Ill. 146; Parsons v. C. I. C. & I. Co. of La Salle, 38 Ill. 430; Norton v. Colby, 52 Ill. 198; Carroll v. Forsythe, 69 Ill. 127; Homer v. Starkey, 27 Ill. 13; Sennott v. Homer, 30 Ill. 429; Wooters v. King, 54 Ill. 343; Hayward v. Gunn, 4 Ill. App. 161.
¶4The letter written by appellee, February 2, 1890, is an unqualified acknowledgment of the debt represented by appellant’s note, and an intention to pay the same; so too, is the letter written March 18, 1892. That the note in suit is the note mentioned in each of these letters, was admitted upon the trial of the cause.
¶5The letters offered in evidence should have been admitted.
¶6The judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed, and the cause remanded.