
    Lott v. Adams.
    The District Court has iurisdiction of a suit on two promissory notes amounting in the aggregate) to S1U0, exclhsive of interest.
    Appeal from Harrison.
    Ardrey, for appellaut.
    
      J. P. Henderson, for appellee.
   Ln’tSOOMB, J.

This suit, was brought in this case on two notes of hand, each of them under f-iOO, hut in the aggregate making á sulh considerably over that amount. According to the decision of litis court in the, case, of Mays v. Lewis, decided at the. present, term, vhe suit was well brought, and the jurisdiction of the District Court is sustained.

Ju(lgment, afflnn(;d.  