
    NICHOLAS S. THOMPSON v. THOMAS B. WRIGHT.
    The tendering of an appeal bond executed according to law, is a demand of an appeal.
    This was an application for a mandamus to be directed to the Court of Common Pleas of the county of Gloucester, to re-instate an appeal which had been dismissed.
    It appeared, that the Court of Common Pleas had dismissed an appeal, because it did not appear by the transcript of the justice “ at ' what time, or when the appeal was demanded.” The transcript immediately after the rendition. of the , judgment,, which was on the 7th May, 1831, stated, that “the defendant-demanded of me an appeal, which I granted, and June 4, 1831,. tendered me an .appeal bond, executed according to law, which I accepted.
    
      Armstrong for appellant.
    
      Southard for appellee.
   By the Court.

The Court of Common Pleas erred. The transcript of the justice may fairly and grammatically read, that the appellant asked for, or demanded an appeal at the time of the rendition of the judgment, and afterwards on the 4th of June, 1831, complied with the requisites of the law, by tendering an appeal bond. If the words previous to the 4th of June, were stricken out, still the record would be a sufficient compliance with the law. The tendering of an appeal bond executed according to law is a demand of an appeal.

Let a mandamus be issued.  