338 CHASE 9. MANHARDT.

tember term, on the plea of nul tiel record, judgment was rendered
for the plaintiff; and an issue having been made up on the plea of
nulla bom, there was a verdict on it and judgment rendered for the
plaintiff on the 13th of October 1817, against the garnishee Chase
for the sum of $9326 62. Upon which judgment an appeal was
prayed and granted. And on the 29th of June, 1818, the judg-
ment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. *

It appears, that the complainant Chase was consulted as to the
nature of the papers and documents which he wished to obtain by
his contract of the 26th of March, 1812 ;—that they were prepared
and executed agreeably to instructions which he himself gave; and
after the attachment had been laid in his hands, on the 17th of
July, 1812, they were tendered to him; and offered to be delivered,
upon his .giving his notes for $6000, payable in six months there-
after; which notes he refused to give, because of the attachment
which had been laid in his hands as garnishee of Bryden; choos-
ing rather to await its judicial termination. It was never proposed
to deliver the papers on obtaining judgment on the attachment; nor
did Chase ever offer to give or suffer judgment on receiving the
papers; nor did he object in any manner to the sufficiency of the
deeds, that had been tendered. Indeed, so far from it, on being
expressly asked, if he had any objections to them, he replied he
had none.

When the jury was sworn to try the issue on the plea of nulla
bona, the papers, which Bryden had stipulated to deliver, were pro-
duced; to show that he had complied with the contract on his
part; and that, in consequence thereof. Chase had become his
debtor for the sum of $6000, with interest thereon. And it being
believed and supposed, by the attorneys, David Hoffman and John
Purviance, (for they alone conducted the trial,) that the principal
and interest of the debt due from Chase to Bryden amounted to
$9326 62, the jury were permitted or directed to find a verdict for
that sum; upon which a judgment was rendered.

Soon after this judgment was obtained. Chase complained to
David Hoffman, the attorney for Manhardt, and also to John Pnr-
t?iance, that it had been obtained for much more than was really
due, even if he were chargeable with interest; but that he ought
not to have been, and could not lawfully be charged with interest
at all, according to the terms of his contract. Upon which those
attorneys both insisted, that he was chargeable with interest from
the date of the purchase* But they agreed, that if it should appear