
    Good v. Sprigg.
    An indorser, who has been discharged by the laches of the plaintiff, is not bound by a promise to pay, unless he knew, at the time of his promise, the fact of laches.
    Assumpsit against the indorser.
    
      Mr. Jones, for the defendant,
    contended that the defendant was not bound by his promise to pay, not knowing that demand of payment had not been made of the maker, and that it was incumbent on the plaintiff to show that the promise was made by the defendant with a knowledge of that fact.
   And so the Court decided.

Cranch, C. J.,

doubting whether the burden of proof, as to that fact, was not on the defendant.  