
    Samuel C. Brewer vs. Bessinger & Steppacher.
    As a general rule, all specialties import a consideration.
    The covenant of B. to erect a brick house of certain dimensions named therein, is a sufficient consideration for the instrument upon which suit was brought.
    In error from the circuit court of Monroe county; Hon. F. M. Rogers, judge.
    The defendant in error, on the 13th day of March, 1849, sold to the plaintiff in error, the east half of lot numbered seven hundred and sixty-five, lying in the town of Aberdeen, for the sum of eight hundred dollars, payable in equal annual instal-ments of one, two, and three years, with interest at the rate of six per centum from date; and for and in the further consideration, that the said Brewer should build and erect on said lot, a good and substantial brick building, at least two stories high, to be completed and finished during the aforesaid year of 1849, suitable and intended for a convenient storehouse; or that, in the event that the said defendant below failed or neglected to build and erect the above described house on said lot during said year 1849, and before the expiration thereof, then, and in that event, the said defendant below should pay to. the plaintiff below, as a part of said further consideration of sale and purchase, the sum of two hundred dollars. This latter sum of money being the amount of liquidated damages,. stipulated and agreed upon between the parties.
    The plaintiffs, on their part, bound themselves by the same indenture to make titles, &c., whenever the purchase-money should be paid, &c.
    The defendant below failed to build and erect the house within the time he bound himself to do so, or even up to the time when the plaintiffs below brought suit. He also failed to pay the two hundred dollars, and plaintiffs below brought suit for the said sum on the covenant mentioned. The defendant (Brewer) demurred generally to plaintiff’s declaration, which was overruled by the court, and, Brewer failing to plead over, judgment was rendered for plaintiff below, and Brewer prayed a writ of error.
    
      R. Davis, for plaintiff in error.
    
      James L. Herbert, for defendants in error, filed an elaborate written argument.
   Mr. Justice Fisher

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendants in error brought an action of covenant in the circuit court of Monroe county, to recover of the defendant the sum of two hundred dollars, for liquidated damages, which had become due to the plaintiffs in the action, by reason of the defendant’s breach of the covenant entered into.

The defendant below filed, a general demurrer to the declaration, which was overruled by the court, whereupon a judgment by default, with writ of inquiry, was rendered, which was executed at the sametterm of the court.

The covenant upon which the action is founded, states that the plaintiffs below had sold to the defendant a certain lot in the town of Aberdeen, at the sum of $800; and that it was part and parcel of the contract, that the defendant should erect on said lot a brick storehouse, of certain dimensions, by the first day of January, 1850; and on his failure to erect said house, then he should pay, by the 1st of January, 1850, to the plaintiffs, the sum of $200, for liquidated damages, &c. It is insisted, that inasmuch as the defendant was to erect the building on the lot which he had purchased from the plaintiffs, that there was no sufficient consideration for the covenant. As a, general rule, all specialties import a consideration ; and in the present case it is easy to imagine the consideration moving between the parties. A brick ho.use, of the description named in the covenant, might have added greatly to the value of the other property of plaintiffs in that part of the town. Again, such a building would not have been as likely to take fire as a wooden building, and this consideration may have influenced the parties, besides many others which might be enumerated.

Judgment affirmed.  