
    * Abel Moore versus Luther Eames, Administrator of Luther Eames, Jun.
    It is not sufficient to abate a writ against an administrator, that, after the service of the writ, and before the entry of the action, the estate had been represented insolvent, &c.
    Assumpsit. The writ was tested the 18th of November, i816, and a partial service was made upon it on the 20th of the same month. The defendant pleaded, in abatement of the plaintiff’s writ and declaration, that, after the service of the writ, and before the entry of the action in the Common Pleas, viz., on the 22d day of the same November, he represented to the judge of probate that the estate of his intestate was insolvent, that commissioners were ap pointed to receive and examine the claims, that they duly advertised, &c.; and that he, the defendant, had conformed himself to the directions of law in respect to the settlement of the said estate.
    To this plea the plaintiff ^demurred, and the defendant joined in demurrer.
    
      Hoar for the plaintiff.
    
      Tyler and Hilliard for the defendant.
   Per Curiam.

The defendant has pleaded the apparent insolvency of (he estate of which he is administrator, in abatement; but it appears, by the plea, that the represeniation of insolvency was not made until after the test of the writ, and after it actually issued. The writ was, therefore, good when it issued, and cannot be abated by the subsequent proceedings in the probate office. The defendant must answer over, 
      
      
         Hunt vs. Whitney, 4 Mass. Rep. 620
     