Concerning the cafe of Mr. Camm I know nothing certain, but am informed that the vifitors confented to what was done. Mr Taylor is incorrect in ftating that there were not a fufficient number of members in Deconvocation. cember 1779 to form I fuppofe it need not appear, on the proceedings, that every member was fummoned, fhould it even be neceflary (which I do not admit) that fuch fhould be the fact. BY THE COURT. Let it be certified that, on the merits of the case, the General Court ought not to award a writ of mandamus to reftore the plaintiff to the office of grammar mafter and profeffor of humanity in the faid college. ACCOUNT. I A fettlement of a public account by the Solicitor General in confequence of an order of the Executive, did not bind the claimant, altho he received fome payments under the fettlement. Commonwealth, vs. Beaumarchais. 122. AMENDMENT. I, If the right judgment be rendered in the county court and upon an appeal to the Difftrict Court the clerk fends up an erroneous record, on which the judgment is affirmed; this court will, upon a view of the record of the County Court, reverfe that of the Dif trist Court, and direct them to iffue a writ of certiorari for the true record; fo that the right judgment may be given. 502. Williams vs Strickler. 2. In an order of reference to a commiffioner to take an account between the parties, all accounts between them ought to be fettled. Harris vs. Magee. AGENT. 1. If a merchant abroad writes to his correfpondent here to buy grain for him and to draw bills for the amount, the agent here cannot exceed his powers, and if a third per. fon fells again to the agent without a reference to the agency or to the principal, he cannot recover of the principal, altho the agent draw bills on the principal for the pur. chafe money at the time of the fale. Blane vs Proudfit. 207 AGREEMENT. I. A. agreed in confideration of £25,000 paper money, to be paid him by B. in the years 1780 & '81, to pay the i latter £2,500 fpecie in 1790. The contract was obligatory. Bracken vs Griffin 433. Vide CONTRACT. 230. 2. The declaration may be amended after a trial, and a juror withdrawn. Jude vs Syme, 522 3. If in ejectment the demife be laid precedent to the plaintiffs title, it is cured by the act of jeofails. Duval vs Bibb. 361 ASSUMPSIT. 1. The defendant in an action upon a fettled account cannot go into an enquiry concerning the juftice of the feveral items of demand stated in the account. Lyne vs Gilliat. 5. 2. Loofe conversations of the executor are not fufficient to raife an affumpfit. Henderson vs Foote. 248 1. The 15 per cent damages are not recoverable against an attorney who receives the money of his client and fails 1. A magiftrates attachment again an abfconding debtor, can only iffue from the county where he refided, or is actually found, at the time of iffuing of it. Barnet vs Darnielle 413 2. As diftrefs for rent cannot be made off the demifed. premifes, an attachment, at the fuit of a creditor againft the tenant as an abfconding debtor, ferved upon property found off the premifes, will be prefered to the land. lords claim for rent. Mosby vs Leeds. 439 3. In an attachment againit an abfconding debtor, judgmert fhould be firft entered against the debtor, and then the garnifhee fhould be ordered to pay it. George vs Blue. 455 4. If the attachment demand only £44 15 5 and cofts, the court cannot give judgment for interest. ibid. AUDITOR. 1. An appeal lies, from the decifion of the Auditor, to the courts in all cafes.-Commonwealth vs Beaumarchais AVERMENTS. 122 performance without any notice of non payment from the creditor, and therefore it was not neceffary to aver notice. Ibid. BILLS OF QUIA TIMET. 1. A. devifes flaves to his wife for life, remainder to his children. The wife marries B, who empowers C. to fell the flaves; C does fell them to D, who was ignorant of the right of thofe in remainder, and D fells them to E. If the remaindermen bring a bill of quia timet against B, D & E, the court will decree B to give fecurity for the forthcoming of the flaves at the death of his wife, but as D was a purcha fer, without notice, he will not be compelled to give fuch fecurity. Chisholm vs Starke. 25 BILLS OF REVIEW. Quere Whether the court of chancery can grant a bill of review to a decree of the court of appeals or of a county court, upon new matter discovered after the decree was made. Currie vs Burns. 183 BILLS OF EXCHANGE. If A purchase of B a foreign bill of Exchange, which is af 1. What averments are fuf- terwards loft before it is pre ficient in a declaration. ΤΟΙ Austin vs Richardson. 2. Where the defendant undertook to fee money paid, he was bound to look to the fented, and B refuses to give a fecond bill, A may bring indebitatus assumpsit for the purchase money. Murray vs Carret. 73 BONDS & OBLIGATIONS procefs and to be governed by Where a joint bond was given prior to the act of 1786 & after that act went into operation one of the obligo died, living the other, the obligation furvived, and the executors of the deceafed were exone. rated. Elliott vs Lyon. 269 2 If an act of Aflembly directs that a bond fhall be payable to the Juftices, and that the penalty fhall be £1000. If the bond be taken payable to the governor, and the penalty be 10,000 and a fuit is brought thereon by a fucceeding governor for the benefit of a party injured, it cannot be fuftained. Stuart vs Lee. 428 3 A joint obligation furviv. ed before the act of 1786. Watkins's ex. vs Tate. 521 4 If a forthcoming bond be not good as a ftatutary bond, it may be good as a bond at common law. Johnston vs Meriwether The party who caveats muft fhew a title to the warrant under which his own furvey is made. 28 Currie vs Martin. 2 The Court of Appeals has jurifdiction in cafes of caIbid. veat. 3 Damages are not to be given upon affirmance of the judgment in cafes of caveat.e I The owner of particular certificates will be entitled to a decree for the certificates themfelves if to be had, and if not, to their value at the time of the decree. Alexander vs Morris. 89 If a clerk of a court iffue a writ of scire facias for too little, and the plaintiff obtains judgment and fues out execu tion for the fum in the scire facias he fhall recover against the clerk in a fubfequent action the difference between the true fum for which the scire facias ought to have iffaed and that for which it did iffue, nor will it make any difference whether the fpecial verdict finds fpecial damage fustained by the plaintiff or not. Russell vs Clayton. 41. COMMISSIONERS. The county were not entitled to 20 befides their fees for fervices in the years 1787, '88 & '89. Commonwealth vs Garth. 6 1. One contracting on behalf of the ftate is not liable in his individual capacity. Tutt vs Lewis. 233. Vide AGREEMENTS. CONVEYANCES. 1 If the bargainor continue Hervey vs Preston. 495 in poffeffion after the convey4 A caveat is an equitable ance, that poffeffion will not render a conveyance void. Duval vs Bibb. 862 2 Quere. Whether a feoffment by out one of poffeffion is not void? MLean vs Copper. 367 3 If the verdict does not find title or poffeffion in the grantor, he can convey neither; and therefore his grantee cannot maintain an ejectment against the tenant in poffeffion. Tabb vs Baird. 475 4 Quere. Whether a deed of bargain and fale by one out of poffeffion is not void? Ibid 5 If a grant be made referving a yearly rent, with a condition that the grantor may re-enter if the rent be not paid and no property is found on the land whereof diftrefs can be made, the grantor upon demand made, and failure to pay, may reenter if there be no effects found, and grant to an other. Wartenby vs Moran. 491 COVENANTS Vid. LEASE. DAMAGES. 1 If the defendant appeal from a decree of the High Court of Chancery on a forthcoming bond, the court of appeals may allow 10 per cent damages for retarding the execution. Skipwith vs Clinch. 86 2 On a bond with a collateral condition, the jury may find more damages than are laid in the declaration. Johnson vs Meriwether. 523 3 In debt on a bond damages need not be laid in the declaration or found by the jury. Taylor vs. M Lean. 557 I By the act of 1792, the perfonal eftate was diftributable among the perfons entitled to the realty; and therefore the mother of a deceafed infant was not entitled to any part of his perfonal estate derived from the father. Tomlinson vs Dillard. 106 2 The act of '85, concerning defcents, was reftored by fufpending acts of 1792. Haraison vs Allen, 289. 1. In detinue, if the jury find for the plaintiff, the flaves if to be had, or £250 for each flave and id damages, and the court render judgment for the flaves if to be had, and if not, then the price found by the jury, with the damages and cofts, it is not error. Bates vs Gordon. 555 1. By a devife of the refidue, emblements, growing on land fpecifically devifed to another, will pafs. Fleming vs Bolling, 75 2. The teftator devifes that his book fhall be given up to A. and that he fhall receive all the debts due, and pay all the teftator owes; this is an appointment of A. to perform the office of an executor, but |