1785.
of the Governor, who claimed it as a right to be Chancellor. For this reafon, many inconveniences have been fuffered. No adequate remedy is provided for a breach of truft ; no relief can be obtained in cafes of covenants with a penalty &c. This defect of jurifdiction, has neceffarily obliged the Court upon fuch occafions, to refer the queftion to the jury, under an equitable and confciencious interpretation of the agreement of the parties ; and it is upon that ground, the jury muft confider and decide the prefent caufe.
His Honor, having recapitulated the evidence, concluded with the following obfervations.
The bond is made payable in current money of Pennʃylvania ; but, I would afk, what is the current money oƒ Pennʃylvania ? For my part, I know of none, that can properly be fo called, for current and lawful are fynonymous. In Great Britain, the King by his proclamation may render any fpecies of coin a lawful currency . But here, it can only be done by an act of affembly ; and except in the temporary laws for fupporting the former emiffions of paper-money, there is no pretence that the legiflature has ever interfered upon this fubject. The expreffions in the 2 Sect. of the act of the 27th January, 1777, cannot be conftrued to make the Spanifh milled dollars a legal tender, as they are only mentioned by words of referrence ; but that which was declared to be a lawful tender, and confequently, became the legal currency of the land, was the money emitted under the authority of Congrefs.
To that fpecies of money, therefore, the bond muft be taken to relate ; and the jury will either reduce the penalty to gold or filver, according to the fcale of depreciation ; or, it they think it more equitable, they will find a verdict for the value of the tobacco, and give the plaintiffs legal intereft from the day of fale.
The jury adopted the latter opinion, and found for the plaintiffs with Ł.3,600 damages and 6d. cofts.
WILSON'S Leʃʃee verʃus CAMPBELL.
E
JECTMENT.—Yeates, for the defendant, when called upon at the trial to confefs, Leaʃe, Entry and Ouʃter, confeffed Leaʃe, Entry, and Ouʃter for part only of the tenements laid in the declaration.
This was oppofed by Bradʃord, who contended, that the defendant having taken any general defence, when he firft pleaded, and entered into the common rule, he muft now confefs Leaʃe, Entry and Ouʃter as to the whole ; but the plaintiff can recover no more than he proves the defendant to be in poffeffion of. 1 Att. Prac. 317.
by the court : The defendant muft in this cafe, confefs Leaʃe, Entry, and Ouʃter for the whole tenements laid in the declaration.[♦]
[♦]This cafe was determined at N.P. Carllʃe on the 16 May, 1785, before M‘KEAN, ChieƒJuʃtice, &c.
