Case ID: scl_1/html/0482-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      \n      Per Curiam.\n     Bay, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Executors of Brewton against The Executors of Cannon.
    It is a good general rule, that non-payment of interest no a bond for twenty years» is presumptive evidence that it has been paid oO".
    Though the circumstances of a revolu-lhrti?ry war and ccn-fu&zon, will alter it, which is proper for the consideration of a jury.
    THIS was an action of debt on bond, commenced in Washington district. No payment had been made on the bond for upwards of 24 years. Bay, J. who tried the cause, directed the jury to find for the defendants, as the law presumed it had been discharged, there being no pay» ments indorsed on it within the above period. That it was a rule of law that twenty years elapsing without any payment being made on a bond, is presumptive evidence that it has been paid off. He relied on the authority of EspinassEs Nisi Prius, 254. also, 1 Burr. 4.34. and the jury found accordingly.
    And now a motion for a new trial was made by
    Trezevant, on the ground of misdirection. He argued, that although the reason and authorities will support such a doctrine in England; yet, it is not applicable to the situation and circumstances of this country. It was well known, he said, that various acts, from the time of the provincial congress in 1775 and 1776, till the instalment law in 1789, had all operated to prevent the recovery of debts. That the circumstances of the war, and distresses of the citizens which sprang out of it, prevented them for many years, from paying off their debts ; while many indulging creditors, on the other hand, from principles of compassion, refrained from pressing for their demands. All these things, be contended, so materially altered the situation of this country, that the reasons and principles would not ap~ ply with justice here, which were applicable to the circumstances of an old country, where riches abound and regularity prevails.
   Per Curiam.

It is a good general rule, and no doubt, good law, that if no interest has been paid on a bond Tor twenty years, it shall be presumed to be satisfied 5 and in such case, the defendant may plead solvit ad diem, and rely on the presumption. But war, and the variety of distresses occasioned by a revolution, alter the situation of a country greadv •, and therefore, all these circumstances should have been permitted to have gone to a jury, to judge whether the presumption was so strong as to warrant them to find for the plaintiff, or not.

Bay, J.

assented, after argument, on account of the peculiar circumstances of the country, during and for some time after the war; though, on the trial, he conceived himself bound bj? the rules of law laid down in the books.