
    Davis against Baxter.
    To charge a sheriff’s vendee in an action for the purchase money, it is only necessary to prove the sale, and produce the writ upon which the sale was made.
    ERROR to the district court of Alleghany county.
    This was an action by John M. Davis, marshal of the United States, against Henry Baxter, to recover the purchase money of land, which he had sold by virtue of a writ of venditioni exponas. On the trial, the plaintiff having proved the sale, offered in evidence a certified copy of the record of the judgment upon which the writ issued. The defendant objected to the evidence, on the ground that it did not purport to be an entire copy of the record. The court below (Grier, President) was of opinion that the plaintiff was- only required to give in evidence the writ upon which he made the sale, and therefore overruled the objection, and sealed a bill of exceptions.
    
      M’ Candless and Fetterman, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Shaler, for defendant in error.
   Per Curiam.

To charge a sheriff’s vendee, no more is necessary than to prove the sale and produce the writ. It is not a condition of the sale, that there are antecedent proceedings to support it. The vendee buys, and the officer sells, on terms consistent with the exigence of his writ; which requires him to have the money in court at the return of it. Knowing this, how can the vendee retain against the officer, who is responsible for a prompt execution of his authority? The former is supposed to have examined, before hand, the proceedings which are to form a part of the title; or if he has been negligent in that respect, he still has a remedy; not, however, by defence against the sheriff, but by application to have the sale set aside for defect of authority, and to take his money out of court: but he must comply with his contracbin the mean time..

Judgment affirmed.  