
    Starr, Administrator de bonis non of Catharine Whitehead, v. Henshaw, Administrator of Walker, Deceased.
    Interest allowed on a scire facias against an administrator ori. the ground of a special agreement.
    'Soiee Eacias, showing that said Catharine, in July A. D. 1787, recovered judgment before the Superior Court against said Henshaw, for the sum of £140 6s. 6d. lawful money, and had execution in due form of law;, that on the 17th of July A. D. 1788 said Henshaw made and subscribed on the back of said execution, his promise and engagement in consideration of forbearance, and of two resolves of assembly, to pay the lawful interest, from the 2d of November A. D. 1787, until said execution should be paid; and also agreed that the interest should be collected of him at the same tiriie and manner as the principal debt. Praying for judgment for the sums in said execution and also* for the interest from said 2d of November A..D. 1787.
    The defendant demurred to this declaration; and assigned for cause that said declaration was double, containing two distinct matters — rbut did not point out wherein the duplicity •consisted.
    
      Judgment — That the declaration is sufficient, and for plaintiff to recover the principal and the interest.
   By the Court.

Duplicity must be specially pointed out by the demurrer, or it will not hold. But here is no duplicity. It is not double nor inconsistent, to ask for the interest upon the judgment, or to enforce the reasonableness of having it by any agreement of the party or acts of assembly, or other reasonable cause. As the claim of interest was grounded upon the agreement of the defendant, indorsed upon the execution in manner aforesaid, and upon an act of assembly, which is a matter of record, the court had no difficulty in giving judgment for the interest with the principal.  