
    M’Clellan v. Morris.
    Averments not necessary where words are connected with the subject in such manner as to render the meaning obvious.
    EbROR from tbe Court of Common Pleas. M’Olellan brought his action on a promissory note, against Morris, reciting the note in Ms declaration, which was in the following words, viz. “Eor value received, I promise to pay Samuel M’Clellan, or Ms order, £17 3s. 5d. by the 1st day of April next, or use till paid.” There was no averment in the dclaration of what was meant by the words, “ use till paid.”
    On demurrer, for the uncertainty of this declaration, judgment, by the Court of Common Pleas, was for the defendant.
    But the judgment was here reversed: Eor,
   By the whole Court.

The only exception to the declaration, in the original action, is, the uncertainty of the words, “or use till paid; ” and that there is no averment to make them certain.

But’the obvious meaning and intention of those words, taken in connection with the subject-matter to which they are related, must be, that in case the principal sum in the note should not be paid by the time limited for payment, use, or interest, should be allowed thereon after that time, until paid. And the note being declared upon, according to the words of it, the legal sense and operation may be understood with sufficient certainty, without any special averment.  