
    
      Vestry and Wardens of St. Bartholomews vs. Cantey.
    “The statute of limitations -will bar the vestry and wardens of a church, ps well as any other persons.
    This case' was decided by the late Constitutional Court of Appeals, in November Term 1823, but was ac-cidently omitted that year by the Reporter. The Reporter thinks it proper to insert it here, that it may not be lost.
    It was an action of Trover, for a negro, broughtby the plaintiffs against the defendant, in which the question was ¡made whether the church could be barred by the Statute of Limitations,
   Gantt, J.

delivered the opinion of the court. -

Thip case was tried before me, November Term, 1819, for Kershaw District, and on the plea ofthestatute of limitations, a verdict was found for the defendant, correspondent with an opinion expressed by thecourtto the jury, on the law of the case. .

The defendant has appealed, and rests his case on a supposed inaccuracy in the opinion given by the presiding judge (viz.) that the statute was as effectual tobar the Vestry and Wardens of a Parish, as any other description of persons. The court are of opinion that the charge of the presiding judge was correct in law, and that the appellant can take nothing by his motion.

Johnson. Nott, Colcóck and Huger, concurred.  