
    Curtice v. Bulkley.
    Weit op Error to reverse a judgment of a justice, entered up upon the confession of said Curtice to said Bulkley, upon a note in all respects similar to the preceding cause of Curtice v. Seovel, and judgment the same as in that case, both on the abatement and the merits.
    The case of Sage v. Richards adjudged at New Haven adjourned Superior Court, December A. D. 1770' was — Sage executed five £20 notes to Richards to oblige him to abide the award certain arbitrators should make in a controversy submitted to them. He confessed judgment upon each of said notes for £20 debt, with cost allowed to be one shilling, and lodged them with said arbitrators, to oblige him to perform the award.
    Error assigned was ■— That the justice had no right to receive and enter up judgment upon said note by the confession of said Sage as aforesaid.
    Plea — Nothing erroneous.
   Judgment — Manifest error. As the court did not give reasons in writing at this time, I am unable to state them; but presume the same reasons governed the court as in the preceding cases.  