
    William Morrow vs. John Calloway.
    A justice of the peace has no jurisdiction, in a case where the note, or settled account, with the interest thereon, amounts to-more than one hundred dollars.
    Morrow moved the county court of Knox county, for judgment against Calloway, (the sheriff of said county,) for money collected by him, on two venditioni exponas, or orders of sale, directed to said sheriff by the county court of Knox, and founded upon two executions, issued on judgments rendered by a justice of the peace, on the 16th day of October, 1824, against one Bartholomew, one for one hundred dollars, with interest thereon from the 24th day of February, 1816; and the other for the same amount, with interest thereon from the 16th of October, 1824. Upon these executions the sheriff returned, “no personal property found, and levied on two houses and lots, lying near the river, adjoining Fourth street, in the town of Knoxville.”
    James and William Park had also obtained several judgments before justices of the peace, against said Bartholomew, amounting in all to the sum of three hundred and fifty dollars, upon which executions had also issued, and the same return was tpade upon these executions, but the levy on the lots, under these executions, was subsequent to the levy under Morrow’s executions. Orders of sale were obtained upon these executions at the same term with Morrow’s, and the lots advertised and sold under them all. The lots were sold by the sheriff to James Parks, for $350, he being the highest bidder, and the money paid to James and William Parks, in discharge of their, claims against Bartholomew. The county court gave judgment against Morrow, from which he appealed to the circuit court, where the judgment was affirmed, and an appeal in error taken to this court.
    For the plaintiff it was insisted, that the levy on the lots, under his executions, preceded the levy under the executions of the Parks’, and that he had a lien upon them, by virtue of the levy, and consequently his claims must be satisfied first. (Cook’s Rep. 416.)
    For the defendant it was contended, that the judgments of the justice, in favor of Morrow, were void for want of jurisdiction; the judgments were rendered in October, 1824, for one hundred dollars, with interest for several years back, the interest added to the principal, made the amount of each judgment more than one hundred dollars, the magistrate therefore had no jurisdiction. (Act of 1809, ch. 54.
   Per Curiam.

The judgment of the circuit court must be affirmed; a justice of .the peace has jurisdiction upon any bond, bill single, promissory note, or account stated and the balance ascertained to be due under the hand of th.e party, in all cases where the amount does not exceed one hundred dollars — here the judgment, for the principal and interest, considerably exceeded that sum.

Judgment affirmed.  