Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/222

 Cases_ ruled and adjudged in the 216 I193 ¢lu& of thegarnilhee himfelf, fueh cafes will form erce tions W" to the general rule. In the prefent inilance, hogever, tliiere is no proof of fraud, or collulion; nor of any wilful procralii· nation on thepart of the gamilhee; and fraud can never he prefumed. It is true, likewife, that no exprefs authority was . given for laying the attachments; but an implied authority ap3 pears intheoorrefpondenoe thathasheen produced: And the ` ‘ defendant is not anfwerahle for the event. Iam, therefore, of opinion that intereft on§ht not tohe allowed. Smrrnn, jig'!-.2-:. ridenoe will often ltrike dilferent minds inadiferentrnanner. Itdoesnotappeartome, that therewas fuflicient  for inliitnting the   attachment; but, on the contrary, that it was done olhcioully, and at the inllanee of the   himfelf. I lhould, oonfequentl, think it juli, on this oecalion, to allow the claim of intereil:; hut the majori- ty of the Court will fan&ion a different deciliou. Yrurrss, 75/liu. I concur, generally, in the opinion ex- preifed by the Chief juilioe, that there is not fuiiicient ground tolexcept the prefent cafe from the operation-of the general ru e. Bnsnronn, _‘fu/lie:. As I was originally Counfel in this eaufe, I forbear taking any part in the decilion. . BY rua Counr :—It is awarded, that the defendant be dil'· charged, upon payment of the principal fum recovered, with coils} · 7¤¤¤¤v ’ A writ of error was hrcnght by the Plaintiff; and on the ISIII ofjuly 1793, the Hrcn Constr or Ennoxs also Arrests delivered the following judgment. · Bur rn: Counr :-After making eonhderation and dnc deliberation, it is conhdered by the Court here—ril. That the laft judgment nr deeretal ordcr of the Supiezne Court •' T lnt .dndr.·e: Caldwell (hall be rlifcharged from the faid judgm—nt on the payment of [.;or6 gs. atl to wit, the principal firm lbuncl due to liznce, CnHr.·e!l  Vunre, by the fecond report of the referees, and all rolls of 1`uir." he reversed. ad. That the judgment in the Supreme Count rendered in the Term of _‘)imu.·uy rygr, in favor of Ge.»;ge Firggp-r.:.’d, the plaintiff in Error. for the fum. of [ goog 5:. rd. with tlxe collsuf luit, and by agreement of tlnepnrties, {lated, in the Record, made abl`o'ute in fmuagy Term, 1.792, be, and the fame is hereby. according to the terms of the faid agreement, ajfrmed and made sm}:/e. ‘ 'i'he record. was thereupon remitted to th: Supreme Courto

�