
    Hart vs. Altmeyer & Company.
    [Jackson, C. J., did not preside, because of providential cause.]
    1. Allhough, when the term commenced at which the rule nisi to foreclose a mortgage was taken, the debt, to secure which the mortgage was given, was not due, yet if, when the petition and rule nisi were presented, the debt had matured, and the rule nisi was served on the defendant more than three months before the next term, at which the money due on the mortgage was required to he paid; this is all that the mortgagee was entitled to. Code, §§3962, 3964; 20 Ga., 342; 18 Id., 277; 59 Id., 392.
    (a.) This question has never been referred to or decided by the court below, and for this reason can not he reviewed by this court. Code, §4251.
    3. This is a fair question to be brought before this court, and damages for frivolous exceptions should not he awarded.
    Judgment affirmed.
    October 2, 1884.
   Blandford, Justice.

[A. R. Altmeyer & Company proceeded to foreclose a mortgage against M. E. Hart. No plea was filed, and the rule was made absolute. Counsel for defendant asked tor time to see the husband of defendant, in order to learn whether there was any defence, but this was refused. After judgment, defendant excepted and assigned the following errors: ,

(1.) Because the court refused to allow time to defendant’s counsel.

(2.) Because the note secured by the mortgage did not fall due until December 1, 1883; the October term, 1883, of Sumter superior court met on the second Monday in October, and was adjourned until January 10,1884, and at this adjourned term, the note having fallen due, the rule nisi was granted.

(3.) Because the defendant has the entire term at which he is called on to answer to do- so; but the rule absolute was granted before the close of the term.]  