
    Horace How et al., plaintiffs in error vs. Tilly Gilbert et al., defendants in error.
    A motion to set aside a writ of error, and order staying proceedings, made after two years from the issuing of the writ, will be denied with costs, unless sufficient excuse is offered for the delay.
    
      Motion by defendants in error to set aside the writ of error, issued in this cause, and to set aside all orders to stay proceedings, and to recover the costs of settling the bill of exceptions therein, to be taxed.—This cause originated in a justices’ court. An appeal wras tried at the Cattaraugus common pleas in June term, 1841, and a judgment rendered for the plaintiffs Gilbert et al., against the defendants How et ah, for $48’98 damages, which was perfected fqr the damages mentioned and $52'99 costs, on the 10th July, 1841. A bill of exceptions was subsequently in January term, 1842, settled, as of the October term of said court previous. No further proceedings were had in the cause until October, 1842, when an execution was issued on the judgment to the sheriff of Cattaraugus county, tó enforce its collection. In January, 1843, the defendants got • an order staying proceedings and brought a writ of error to remove the cause to this court, and gave notice thereof to the attorneys for defendants in error. The writ of error was filed on the 9th January, 1843. No° further proceedings have been had in said cause since. The defendants in error swear that they never received any notice of the issuing of any writ of error, and the judgment is still due and unpaid.
    Wells, Defts Counsel. J. Burt, Defts Mty.
    
    A. Taber, Plffs Counsel. Fox & Wheeler, Plffs Mttys.
    
   Beardsley, Justice.

Denied the motion on the ground of delay, no excuse shown for not moving sooner.

Decision.—Motion denied with costs.  