laws, is admitted in the courts of this state as good and sufficient evidence, if it be under the hand of the keeper of such record and the seal of the court or office in whichit has been made. If it be only lodged for safe keeping, according to the laws of the place where it was executed, a copy certified in this manner is sufficient.

Where recording is not necessary to give validity to an instrument, by the laws of the country in which it has been executed, proof of the execution, by the oath of any of the subscribing witnesses, taken before any court, judge or justice, or other officer of the same country, who has authority by law to administer an oath, and a certificate under seal from the governor, chief magistrate or a notary public of the country that the court or officer has such authority, and that the oath has been duly made before such court or officer, is sufficient. If all the subscribing witnesses are dead, proof of their handwriting certified in the same manner is admitted.

But where it is intended to introduce such testimony, the plaintiff must make oath before a judge or justice of this state, or, as above, before a court &c. of another state or country, that the instrument was duly executed, and that the debt appearing to be due is not paid or in any manner satisfied, by discount, account in bar or otherwise, to the knowledge or belief of the deponent, but that such part as is stated to be due remains unpaid, according to the best of the knowledge and belief of the deponent. This act does not alter the manner of conveying lands within this state by persons residing out of it,* nor of proving accounts against the estates of deceased persons. In order to authenticate such a claim, if it arise on a specialty, bond, note or protested bill of exchange, the voucher is the instrument itself, or a proved copy in case it be lost, with a certificate of the oath made since the death and indorsed upon or annexed to the instrument a statement of the claim, " that no part of the money intended to be secured by

Vid. American Law Journal, No. I. p. 92.

such instrument hath been received, or any security or satisfaction given for the same, except what (if any) is credited."

If the creditor on such instrument be an assignee, there must be the same oath of the original creditor, with respect to the time of the assignment, and of the intermediate assignees, if there have been any. If the dealing has been with a factor and the principal be not within the state, the factor who took the bond, note &c. or who sold or delivered the articles may make oath, to be certified and indorsed as before, " that the said statement is full, just and true, and that he (the deponent) took the said bond (or note &c. or delivered &c.) as factor to-living in (or lately of;) that neither he (the deponent) nor the principal nor any other person for him, or the principal to his knowledge or belief, hath received any part of the money originally due on such bond &c. or any security or satisfaction for the same, except what (if any) is credited."

LIMITATIONS.

Bonds (except to the state) are not good and pleadable after the principal debtor and creditor have both been dead twelve years, or the debt or thing in action is above twelve years' standing. But there is a saving to infants, those under the disability of coverture, insanity, imprisonment or beyond sea, of five years after the disability is removed. Actions on sheriffs' bonds must be commenced in five years after the term of office has expired; the state may sue at any time, and infants &c. within five years after the disability &c.

Testamentary bonds must be sued within twelve years from their date.

The following brief notes of cases decided in the late general court of this state are copied from the MS. note book of the late judge Sprigg who presided in that court, until a short time before it was abolished.

GENERAL COURT.

Jeremiah T. Chase, Chief Judge,
Done

Richard Sprigg } Judges.

Dixon Slade et ux. v. Robert Morgan.

May 1803. Action of debt on a testamentary bond. General Performance, Replication, Rejoinder, No assets, and Payment, &c.

It was contended, for the plaintiffs, that on the plea, the proof lay on the defendant, that he had legally discharged himself from the claim; and Swinb. 420. 14. Vin. 466. title "Inventory," were cited, that a legatee shall recover against an executor who has returned no inventory.

For the defendant, his counsel urged that the proof of assets lay on the plaintiff, whether he was a legatee or distributee, and that the defendant could not be put to prove a negative. The direction of the court was prayed, that before the plaintiff could recover in this action, he must prove assets in the defendant's hands, which direction the court refused to give.

The defendant then offered to prove that nothing came to his hands but evidences of debts, which were afterwards paid off to him in continental money, but

Per cur. This evidence is inadmissible.

Under the plea of payment, the defendant's account of payments made by him was admitted, and if proved, would have been received by order of the court.

Verdict for the plaintiff. Martin for the plantiffs, Hollingsworth and Johnson for the defendant.

Beal v. Beal et al. admrs. of a surety in a testamentary bond. May 1803. Debt on a testamentary bond. Performance and Limitations, Replications and Rejoinders, Payment, &c.

This action was brought to recover a distributive share after the payment of debts. No account was settled in the orphan's court by the executrix. Other evidence was admitted by the court of payment of debts by her. The defendants offered a copy of a judgment against Sarah Beal, not against Sarah Beal executrix, and parol evidence that it was the debt of the testator. To this the plaintiff objected, inasmuch as there is not the evidence at that time necessary in the orphan's court.

Per cur. Parol evidence that the testator owed a sum of money which the executrix has since paid is admissible: the admission of the executrix on which judgment may have been entered in a court of law in her own name is not evidence against her.

Shaaff & Johnson for the plaintiff, Mason for the defendants. Verdict for the defendants.

A.

Juridical Opinions.

B. effected insurance on brig - vessel, cargo and • freight, at and from Gaudaloupe to New-York, warranting the same to be American property.

The brig sailed from Gaudaloupe on the 22d January last, on the same day she carried away one of her topmasts and stays and bore to leeward of Montserat; was captured by a British privateer and carried into that island, when, after lying some time she parted her cables and drove to sea, was then carried into St. Kitts being still in possession of the privateers

men.

On the 18th March she was tried at Antigua and acquitted on payment of costs, port charges &c. to the amount of 500/. that currency, for which the captain was under the necessity of giving a bottomry on brig and cargo. The brig with her cargo consisting chiefly of molasses arrived in New-York on the 27th April, part of the cargo had become during the detention damaged.

On the 2d of April A. B. tendered an abandonment of the vessel, freight and cargo to the insurers.

On the arrival of the vessel at New-York, the assurers were informed of it and applied to for direction respecting the property; they declined giving any, but gave permission to the assured to dispose of vessel and cargo to the best advantage without prejudice to his claim under the abandonment. A sale of the cargo was accordingly made, but the vessel could not be sold, on account of the bottomry bond remaining in force, and she now lies at New-York subject thereto.

The underwriters refuse to accept the abandonment. Has A. B. a claim for a total loss under the abandonment, or only for an average or partial loss?

A

S the present system of our government, relative to the capture and condemnation of neutrals having on board the produce of the enemy's colonies, is become a subject of the greatest importance to the commercial world in general, and to American citizens in particular, and presuming it may not be uninteresting to yourselves, we take the liberty to hand you on the other side, a copy of a case drawn for the purpose of procuring the best information as to the conduct Now to be adopted by neutrals engaged in such adventure, together with the opinion of one of the most eminent civilians in the admiralty courts. We are &c.

CASE. A. and B. merchants at New-York, subjects and citizens of the United States of America, and extensively connected with the continent of Europe, from the different quarters of which they learn that the produce of the enemy's colonies is selling at high prices, and on contrasting them with those of New-York, they find sufficient margin for successful adventure; in consequence of which, they determine on shipping a cargo of Havanna and Martinique sugars and coffee,