1787.
KUHN verʃus PRIMER.
T
HE Plaintiff had become bound to one Splecit in the payment of a certain fum of money ; and, after the bond was due, he obtained a difcharge under the infolvent laws. Subfequent to his difcharge, the Defendant bought fundry goods of him, and when the price was demanded, tendered Splecit's bond in payment, an affignment of which he had purchafed for that purpofe. The Plaintiff, refufing to accept it, brough this action, and on the trial, the Defendant offered to give the bond in evidence, by way of Dett off ; in confequence of which the ballance would have been turned in his favour.Sergeant, for the Plaintiff, oppofed the admiffion of the bond in evidence, and cited Bull. L.N.P. 179.
Levy contended that the evidence ought to be allowed, and referred to the fame book page 170.
by the court:–The hardfhip that muft attend the admiffion of the bond, would in reafon be alone fufficient to determine us to reject it. An infolvent debtor could never get forward in the world, if his old bonds, and other negotiable papers, were thus capable of being put in force againft him. A debt of Ł. 50 might be bought for 50ʃ. and the debtor, after his difcharge, be liable, by fuch negotiations, to be defeated in every action, and baffled in every contract.
But the law is clear, that the affignment being aƒter the Inʃolvency, the Defendant can be in no better condition than the affignor, who could not only come in for a dividend.[♦]
The evidence was overruled, and Levy tendered a bill of exceptions.[†]