I
N an action of debt upon a bond, judgment being obtained, and execution iffued, Wilcocks moved to ftay proceedings upon this ground ; that, though the bond was dated in June, the confideration, for which it was given, arofe before the 1ʃt of March 1781 ; and therefore, he contended, that his client was within the protection of the Act of Affembly passed the 27th of December 1784, which entitles a defendant to a ftay of execution, for a certain time, upon tendering the intereft and cofts to the fheriff.Bradƒord, for the plaintiff, was prepared with an affidavit to controvert the facts advanced in fupport of the motion ; but he forbore reading it, and infifted that the Court could not travel into a confideration of the tranfactions for which the bond was given.
by the court:– It would occafion infinite trouble and confufion were the defendant's doctrine to be admitted, and it is impoffible to fay where the mifchief would end. It is true, that before a jury, proof my be made of the confideration, and of the time of delivering a bond ; but this Act of Affembly which, in particular cafes, grants a delay of execution to the defendant, upon the tender of the intereft and cofts, muft, furely, at the fame time, recognize the written inftrument as conclusive evidence of the contract ; and we can enquire no father.
Wilcocks took nothing by his motion.