¶1 The case of McKenzie v. Culbreth, 66 N. C., 534, settles that the payment, evidenced by the receipt of 1st of *445 November, 1865, being for an appreciable sum less than the amount due on the note, did not discharge the note in full, but was only a payment pro tanto. The payment is not even stated to be in full in the receipt. The Judge erred therefore in holding it a discharge in full. Judgment reversed and plaintiff will recover in this Court the residue of the note after deducting the payment. It is certainly to be regretted that so much costs should have been incurred for a pitiful claim of about thirty-seven cents.
¶2 Pee Cueiah. Judgment reversed.