
    Rapelje et al. v. Emory.
    
      Interest.
    
   On the trial of this cause, it was ruled by Shippen, President, that where one man has received money belonging to another, and has retained it, without the consent of the owner, it is to be considered in the same light as money lent, and ought to carry interest. He said, that this case was clearly distinguishable from that of goods sold and delivered, where no money actually passes between the parties, and interest is not due of course. 
      
      
         See the note to Henry v. Risk, ante, 265. And see Brown v. Campbell, 1 S. & R. 176; King v. Diehl, 9 Id. 409; Jacobs v. Adams, ante, 52.
     