Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/244

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

838 Casas ruled and adjudged in the I795. ably to the 39th rule of praétice, that evidence to the following BMG eE'e£|:would be oferedonthe trial ofthecaufe,towit; 'Ihatthe bondyas given forpgylmeutoftheconlideration moneyofatraét of land audmill, wh' the plaintifs had fold to thedefendants, rcferving in the deed a rightto {well and raifc the water, fo a: not toinjure the mill; but that the wad _ mer, foanoinjurethemilh The couufel for theiplaintiifs {kggand Ylonoejobjeéied eo the evidence, on theground, that injury, if it had really happened, was inthe nature of a tort, for which .the damages were not afcertaiued, and could not be {et ol? in an action up- on the bond. 1 Bl. Rep- 394- Coup. 5. 6. 4 TZ Rep. 74. 5rr. Doug. 665. 4 Bo:. dor. 116. The defendants’ counfel (lngerjéll and Sitgruues) liated, that the evidence was not meant to operate, ilriétly, as a {et-oi, but as auequitabie defence; The conlideratiou of the bond had, in a great degree, failed by the a& of the plaintiili ;_ and, asthe coulideradon might he cuquired into, any thing is admit`- 7 lible incvidencc onthe plea of payment, which bends eo lhew, that the plaintiilh, ex equoet bono, ought not to recover. t Doi!. Rqo. 17. 260. B`eiides, the refcrvation in the deed is in nature of o covenant, and wherever the intent of the parties appears under hand and feal, an aftion of covenant lies. r Cha. Cu. 294. 6. Wn. Ab-. 381. pL ar. 22. 2 Mod. 9r. r Leon. 277. pl. 1. E. 375. 6 Wn. Abr. 379. pl. 12. 2 Cm. _ _Dg. 559. 560. r Sound. 322. 1 Salk. 196, Cro. Cor, 437; ·r Sid. 423. SI2 Roym. s83. Br me Comvr :—The quellion is, whether, under theli- berality of the praétice of our Courts of juliice, fuch evidence is adrniilible ? To decide in the allirmative, the cafe mult ei- ther he enthracedhly the general provilion of the aéi for defal· cation (r Vol. D . Edit. p. 65.) or by the 39th Rule of the Supreme Court. Now, although our a& of Ailembly extends further than the Brirylv itatutes offd- (2 Geo. 2. ¢·. 22. and - 8 Geo. 2. c. 24) we do not think it comprehcnds a defalca-t tion of the nature contended for : And, though the 39th Rule of the Court afcertains what evidence is admillible on the plea of payment, it contains nothing defcriptive of the prefenz cir- cumiiunces, where there was a good conlidcration for the bond, though the defendants have been injured by the fubfcquent con. duét of the plaintills. - If, however, the defendants would otherwife be without a I remedy, we {hould he folicitous, by any rational conliruéiiondof _. ie