Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/159

 Summa Couar or Pmrjylvania. t;3 Q in·as-much as the onl proof of the plaintil}"s interell: is the l792{ l receipt given by the defendant for the order on 1lIe:¢· U Call- •.¢·•~J i well, which is not aftually fer forth in the {pecial count ; and, { affording an a€tion of a higher nature, is no evidence on the general count for money had and received. Bull. M P. 145. _  1 3 1. Nor could any perfon bring this a€tion, who was not a : pargl to the qyirmg/it. F:/ju. ro;. Cm. E. 369. . ' e plaintiE"s counfel, on the other hand, contended, ill:. That the money received by Craig, was the money of Barr ; ‘ and the moment it was received, it was held in trult for Barr': ufe: to retain it, is contrary to Craig’: own promifc, and to the principles of equity; and a promife to account, is tanta- mount to a promife to pay. 1 Ej}. 23. 1 Sim. 264. 626. ad. That a partnerihip debt cannot be {et ol? againlt a feparate ` debt; and, therefore, as Craig was the creditor of Bank: and Baudain, he could not difcount his demand from the feparate property of Bank; which was the prefent cafe. gd. That there was nothing collulive or fradulent between Bank: and " Barr, in relation to the judgment. The latter, finding that his aclion was erroneoully inltituted, was obliged to make ufe of fome addrefs even to fecure immediate payment of a part of an honeft debt; but the right and the remedy for the balance were clearly left open. 4th. That the aétion is well brought, ‘ andought tobefuitained. 2"elv. 23. 4. r Vent. 318. 332{ ‘ gl!. 133. Doug.- 139. Cawp. 443. 2 BI. Rep. ra69. L. . 303.* · _ _ The Cmar jusrtca delivered the following charge to the ]ury, after Rating the evidence on both lides of the caufe. _ M‘K¤su, C/Jig" _7:_¢Ii¢·e:—The plaintiff had, unqueiiionably, a good caufe of aétion, at the time of inllituting his fuit: But, it appears that at that time alfo, the defendant had a good caufe of action againit Henry Bank: ; and, accordingly, attached cer- tain monies belongin to Bankr, in the hands of Pbrrlz, who was the fpecial bail ofgBauL:, in another aétion, brought againlt him by fame: Barr, the prefent plaintilii Judgment being entered, and a Ca. Sa. ilfued in this lalt mentioned aétion, the bail became liable for the debt ; and, accordingly, we find, that [brd: paid the amount, with coils, to the fheriif; who ` paid it over to the plaintiff} and toolt a receipt in full. This, 1 then, appears to be complete fatisfaétion ; and th· plaintiffape patently ought never to recover more even from Banlu; unlcfs, perhaps, the cofts accrued inthe aétion now tr ing, before the payment by Forde in the other aétion; as in the cafe _of feve- ral fuits againlt the drawer and indorfors of the fame promiiliv- ry note. U But ·" Br ·r:-rr Cocnr :—Tl¤e` form of the artion need not be la- boured By the plaioti£l"’s cou ofel.

�