
    Palmer versus Goodwin.
    A contract, made by a citizen of Massachusetts, with a citizen of this State, for the payment of money, is not barred by a discharge under the insolvent laws of that State.
    Assumpsit, by the indorsee against the maker of the following note.
    “ Boston, Sept. 7, 1847. Three months after date, I promise to pay E. Moore & Co. or order one hundred and fifty dollars, value received.”
    The note was indorsed by the payees and by a second indorser. These indorsers, together with the plaintiff, were always residents of Maine. The defendant was of Massachusetts. After pay-day of the note, he applied for and ob-tamed a discharge under the insolvent laws of that State. The case was submitted for nonsuit or default, according to legal rights.
    
      Danforth and Woods, for the plaintiff.
    
      Whitmore, for the defendant.
   Shepley, C. J.

A contract made by a citizen of Massachusetts with a citizen of this State to pay a sum of money is not discharged by proceedings under the insolvent Acts of that State. Savage v. Marsh, 10 Metc. 594; Fiske v. Foster, idem. 597. This action is upon a promissory note made by the defendant, a citizen of Massachusetts, and payable to citizens of this State. Defendant defaulted.  