
    denied. Richmond against Roberts.
    
    NEW-YORK,
    Nov. 1810
    granted. Where a gaolei* discharged a de- fendant in exe- cution, on his executing to him a bund,with a warrant of at- torney, for the amount of the debt, and addi- tional charges, the court set aside the judg- ment entered up on the bond and the warrant of attorney, and left the party to seek his remedy by an action oi. the bond, so that the defendant might avail him- seif of any de- fence at
    law. V/hethvr such a bond* taken by a sheriff or gaol- er, is not against the statute, as taken for case and favour, and by colour of of- fice ?
    Roberts. THE defendant in this cause was taken on a ca. sa. by the sheriff of Columbia, at the suit of Alexander Pope, and committed to the custody of the plaintiff, as gaoler. The plaintiff took a bond, payable in ten days, and a war- rant of attorney to confess judgment thereon, for the amount of the ca. sa. together with 10 dollars, for addi- tional costs and charges of the plaintiff. At the end of the ten days, judgment was confessed and entered up on the bond. A motion was now made to set aside the judgment and warrant of
   attorney. Per

Curiam. The judgment and warrant of attorney must be set aside. To tolerate a practice, for a sheriff or gaoler to take a judgment bond from a prisoner charged in execution, for the amount of the execution, and such other charges as the sheriff or gaoler may think proper to demand, would lead to the greatest abuse and oppres- sion. Such bonds, at least, ought to be open to every inquiry and defence at law. We arc inclined to think, that such bonds are against the statute, as being taken. for ease and favour, and by colour óf office ; but on this point we do not mean to give an opinion, or to conclude the party; but merely set aside the judgment and war- rant of atttorney, and leave the plaintiff, if he pleases, to prosecute the bond at

law. Motion  