
    Bell v. Bugg.
    Thursday, March 31st, 1814.
    1. Slander — Declaration—Sufficiency.—A declaration in slander, laying the charge in the alternative, viz. that the defendant spoke certain words, “or words of the same import,” is good after verdict.
    2. Supersedeas — Extended Judgment on Forthcoming Bond. — The effect of a writ of supersedeas may be extended to a subsequent judgment on a forfeited forthcoming bond, without issuing another writ. See Monroe v. Webb’s exefcutors, ante.
    In this case, (after a verdict for the plaintiff in slander,) the defendant moved, in arrest of judgment, that no actionable charge was made in the declaration, “both counts being laid in the alternative ; that.is to say, that the defendant spoke certain words, or words of the same import.” The Superior Court of law over-ruled the motion, and entered judgment for the plaintiff; whereupon the defendant obtained a,writ of supersedeas from a judge of this court; and, on the petition of the plaintiff in error, Tuesday, November 24th, 1812, the same writ of supersedeas was extended to a, judgment which had subsequently been obtained upon a forfeited forth-coming bond.
    Wickham for the plaintiff in error. .
    Wirt, contra.
    
      
      See monographic note on “Libel and Slander” appended to Bourland v. Eidson, 8 Gratt. 27.
      Supersedeas — Judgment on Forthcoming Bonds.— Sw foot-note to Monroe v. Webb, 4 Munf. 73, collecting cases citing the principal case.
    
   Thursday, March 31st, 18Í4,

JUDGE ROAÑE

pronounced, the court’s opinion, that there was nó' error in the judgment, which was therefore affirmed.  