
    Hurd v. Hall.
    In, an action of indebitatus assumpsit, the plaintiff's mentioning in Lis declaration of whom the money was received, for which the defendant was indebted, does not vitiate the declaration.
    AotioN of indebitatus assumpsit, declaring that on tbe 1st of February A. D. 1786 tbe defendant was indebted to tbe plaintiff £45 for money before that time bad and received for tbe plaintiff’s use, viz. moneys received of Ard Welton, wbicb was in part pay for a farm sold to said Welton in October A. D. 1785 and being so indebted, etc. assumed and promised, etc. Demurrer to tbe declaration.
    Tbe exception was — That tbe defendant’s receiving tbe money of Welton, did not create an indebtedness to tbe plaintiff, without a special request to pay it, and a refusal or a misapplication of tbe money.
   Judgment — That tbe declaration is sufficient. Tbe averment is direct and positive that tbe defendant was indebted for money bad and received for tbe plaintiff’s use, wbicb is all tbat was necessary. See Lawrence v. Clark, New Haven tbis circuit, and tbe plaintiff’s mentioning of whom tbe money was received is for tbe defendant’s advantage.  