
    Daniel Hastings versus Ebenezer Wiswall.
    Upon a note made payable in a certain number of years, with interest anmudly judgment can be recovered only for simple interest on the principal sum.
    Assumpsit by the endorsee against the endorser of a promissory note of the following tenor, viz.
    
    
      “ Cambridge, June 5th, 1804. — For value received of Mr. Isaac Nichols, I promise to pay him or order the sum of three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars in five years from date, with interest annually
    
    
      Asa Nichols.”
    
    The defendant was defaulted at the last term, and the action was continued for judgment by consent to this term.
    Upon inspection of the note, it appeared that the interest had been paid for the two first years. — The plaintiff now moves the court for judgment, and for a direction to the clerk, that when making up the damages, the interest due by the terms of the note at the end of each year should be added to the principal, and interest be cast on the aggregate * of those two sums, and so from year to year, to the time of the judgment.
    
      
      
         [There seems to be no reason why interest should not be allowed upon the interest due annually from the time when it became due. But compound interest cannot be recovered. See Greenleaf vs. Kellogg, 2 Mass. Rep. 568, and note to that case.— Ed.]
    
   But the Court

denied the motion, observing that the plaintiff might have brought his action for the interest at the expiration of each year, and that by neglecting this he might be considered as waiving his claim to compound interest. The clerk was directed to add simple interest to the principal for the time that the interest remained unpaid, and to enter up judgment for that amount with costs.

Munroe. for the plaintiff.

Fay for the defendant,  