HAMMOND v. HAMMOND—2 BLAND. 353

sura certain, except where there was a breach of covenant; and,
in that action, the defendant being commanded to render to the
plaintiff the debt, or shew cause, the payment of the specified
debt, without anything' more, answered the action and put an
end to the suit. And thus, interest forming no proper part of the
original debt at law, it was held to be created only by the nature
of the security. This general rule, it is said, prevents acts of
kindness from being converted into mercenary bargains; and, by
making it the interest of traders to press for payment, thereby
checks that pernicious extension of credit which is so often ruin-
ous to both parties. Andernon v. Dwyer, I Scho. & Left: 303; Hig-
gins v. Sargent. 9 Com. Laic Rep. 101; Arnott v. Red-fern, 13 Com.
Law Rep. 1: Fruit liny v. Shroeder, 29 Com. Law Rep. 260. But in
debt upon a bond, with a condition to pay a lesser sum, the defend-
ant was authorized by a statute to make satisfaction by the payment
of the lesser sum with * interest. 4 Ann, ch. 16, s. 12,13; Tidd
Pra. 484, And in many other cases, where there is either 368
an express or implied contract or usage of trade requiring interest
to be paid, as on negotiable notes and the like, the English Courts
of common law give interest down to the day of signing the judg-
ment. Robinson v. Bland, 2 Burr. 1085; Pierce v. Fothergill, 29
Com. Laic Rep. 290. And so too, where there has been a wrong-
ful withholding of the debt, the jury is permitted to bring in a
verdict allowing interest in the shape of damages for the detention
of the money. But, in general, no interest is ever given, by the
English Courts, upon mere simple contract debts, as for goods sold
and delivered, &c. Blaney v. Hendrick, 3 Wils. 205; Gordon v.
Swan, 12 East, 419; Marshall v. Poole, 13 East, 98; Calton v. Bragy,
15 East, 223. A plaintiff is not suffered to sue out execution, in
any case, for more than the whole amount awarded to him by his
judgment; yet if his judgment be not satisfied, he may bring an
action of debt upon it; in which the whole accumulated amount
of it, constituted of the principal and interest of the debt, or the
damages assessed, and the costs, considered as one entire debt
will be allowed to carry interest until the signing of judgment in
such action. Bodily v. Bellamy, 2 Burr. 1095; Entwistle v. Shep-
herd, 2 T. R. 78: Creuze v. Hunter, 2 Ves. Jun. 162, 107; Arnott v.
Redfern, 13 Com. Law Rep. 1; Churcher v. Stringer, 22 Com. Law
Rep. 183; Watkins v. Morgan, 25 Com. Law Rep. 584; Pierce v.
Fothergill, 29 Com. Law Rep. 296; Petersdorfs Abr. tit. Interest.

In Maryland interest on money is not only given in all cases
where, in England, it would be awarded to the creditor; but in
many other cases where, according to the English law, he would
not be. allowed to recover anything in the nature of interest for the
detention of his money. It is here given by the Court, or left to
the jury, as in some cases in England, to give or not, at their
pleasure, in almost all kinds of cases; Francis v. Wilson, 21 Com
23 2 B.