
    James C. Sayre against Abigail Blanchard.
    ON CERTIORARI.
    Rule on justerm to which ed^oftheUrn" transcript perfected' 
    
    THIS certiorari was returned to the last term, and now Attorney-General applied for a rule on the justice, to certify whether a charge of interest in the plaintiff’s account w'as made before the account was filed, or at the time of entering up judgment, or at what time.
    
      Wall objected,
    that the rule ought to have been applied for, at the last term, to which the writ was returned.
    
      
      Attorney-General.
    
    The certiorari was brought because was no evidence, and the judgment was in the absence of the defendant; but on a corner of the state of demand it is noted, that the defendant admitted the plaintiff’s account. This rendered it necessary to apply for this rule.
    
      
      
         Thorp vs. Ross, post 720.
      
    
   By the court.

It is too late; the rule cannot no-w be. granted.

It then appeared, that at the last term, upon the return of the writ, Wall, for defendant in certiorari, had obtained a rule on the justice to amend and perfect his record, as to the admission of the defendant below, which he had done to the present term.

By the court.

If that be so, the present application is in time. A rule like this need not be applied for until the return is perfected. •

Rule granted.  