THIS was an action of covenant on articles of agreement, dated 22d January, 1779; by which the plaintiff fold to the defendant a plantation; and the defendant covenanted to pay £ 500 immediately, and £ 500 in annual instalments. The first payment was made, and bonds were given for the residue of the money.
The question now principally agitated, was — whether the money was to be reduced by the scale of depreciation, or to be paid in gold and silver?
The plaintiff offered a witness to prove, that, at the time of the covenant being executed, it was agreed the instalments should be paid in whatever money was current, at the time they became due.
SHIPPEN, Justice:
In Grass versus Whitmer, it was determined in this Court, that such proof might be made; and even after judgment by default, in debt on bond, the cause was sent to auditors to ascertain the value or kind of money. I cannot in consequence say such proof ought to be rejected; and this very point has been settled in that of Hurst versus Kirkbride.
BY THE COURT: — Let the evidence be heard, and the point reserved for the defendant, if he shall think it proper to move for a new trial.
The verdict being for plaintiff, a motion for a new trial was accordingly made, and argued by Ingersoll, at the same time with the case of Field and Eiddle: ( Ant. p. 171) But the counsel for the plaintiff submitted the point without argument. And
BY THE COURT: — The rule must be discharged.