
    NATHANIEL TAYLOR vs. JONAS AND WILLIAM SPIVEY.
    Where to an action on a justice’s judgment the defendant pleads “the statute of limitations,' ’ the plaintiff cannot reply a new promise within the seven years. The replication of a new promise is confined to actions "on promises.”
    Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Gates County, at the Fall Term 1850, his Honor Judge Caldwell presiding.
    
      Jordan, for the plaintiff.
    
      A. Moore, for the defendants.
   Peabsoit, J.

This was a warrant on a former judgment of a single justice. The defendants relied on the statute of limitations. The plaintiffs in the replication alleged a' new promise within the seven years. His Honor correctly decided, that the statute could not thus be met. The replication of a new promise is confined to actions ‘on promises.” This is settled in this State and England.

The other instructions were uncalled for; at all events the plaintiffhas no right to complain of them.

Per Curiam, Judgment affirmed.  