
    
      Langdon and Ward vs. John Troy.
    HE executed a writ as sheriff, upon a defendant sued hy these plaintiffs, and returned the writ without a bail bond ; whereby he became answerable as bail himself. There was judgment against the defendant, and a capias cd satisfaciendum against him, returned non est inventus ; and this is a scire facias to charge Troy as bail; the defendant demurred generally ; and his counsel now argued that thesci.fa. is in the nature of a declaration and should state all circumstances material and necessary to support the plaintiff’s demand. And this scire facias does not state that any ca. sa. ever issued, which is expressly required by the act of 1777, ch. 2, sec. 19. And of this opinion the court' seemed to be, but ordered precedents to be searched ; and on this day Mr. Jocelyn, for the plaintiff, produced the entry of a sci.fa. against bail, in the case of Atkinson vs. Wilcox, inLII-ley’s Entries, 307 ; and divers other cases from same book, where no mention is made of the ca. sa.
    
   Per curiam.

The return of the ca. sa. is equally necessary im England as it is here ; and the want of it may be made an exception, but it must be stated in the defendant’s plea — we will not change thejpfecedents, therefore let judgment be lor the plaintiff.

Vide 2 Co. Inst. 184, 187.  