
    Bowden, Executor of Moore, v. Taggart.
    Argued, Nov. 28th, 1811.
    Administrator — Action of Debt. — An administrator may declare in the debet and detinet on a bond executed to himself as such, and his executor, or administrator, has a right to bring an action upon it.
    William Bowden, executor of Robert Moore, who was administrator of John M’Murray, brought an action of debt in the county Court of Prince Edward, against John Taggart, on a bond which was stated in the declaration to have been executed “to the said Robert Moore, as administrator of John M’Murray.” The defendant pleaded payment, but, a verdict being found against him, moved in arrest of judgment on the ground that the plaintiff, as executor, had no right to recover a debt which was due to his testator, in his character of administrator. The county Court was of opinion that the law was for the defendant, and their judgment was affirmed by the superior Court of law; whereupon the plaintiff obtained a writ of supersedeas from a judge of this Court.
    George K. Taylor, for the plaintiff.
    There can be no doubt that the judgment is erroneous. .The bond having been executed to Robert Moore, there can be no doubt that his executor was entitled to sue upon it.  The circumstance that it was given to him asan administrator, makes no diflerence, for the bond was his own property, and he was responsible to the estate of his intestate. Besides, the consideration of the *bond was mere surplusage, being not necessary to be stated in the declaration.
    
    ISfo counsel appeared for the defendant.
    
      
       1 Esp. N. P. 217.
    
    
      
       1 Wash. 259, Peter v. Cocke.
    
    
      
      Administrator— Action of Debt. — See monographic note on "Executors and Administrators” appended to Rosser v. Depriest, 5 Gratt. 6.
      Same — Bonds for Sale of Personalty — Effect.—When an administrator sells personal property of his intestate, and takes bonds therefor, this is a conversion of the assets of the estate and he becomes liable as administrator to account for the amount of sales, the bonds become his individual property, and pass to his administrators on his death. Estill v. McOlintic, 11 W. Va. 409, citing: principal case and Wernickv. McMurdo, 5 Rand. 51.
    
   Saturday, January 9th, 1813, the president pronounced the opinion of the Court, that the obligation, on which this suit was brought, not appearing to be an original credit of the intestate, John M’Murray, but taken and made payable to the testator of the plaintiff, and on which he could have maintained an action, in the debet and detinet, as for his own credit, that right of action, therefore, devolved on the plaintiff, as his executor, who was, therefore, competent to maintain this suit. The judgments of both the Courts below were, therefore, reversed, and judgment entered for the plaintiff upon the bond.  