
    [Chambersburg,
    October 25, 1824.]
    MEALS and another, Executors of WALKER, against WILEY and Wife.
    IN ERROR.
    An action for a legacy, is not within the provisions of the act of the 21st of March, 1806, authorizing a statement to be filed instead of a declaration.
    Writ of error to the Common Pleas of Mams county, in an action for a legacy bequeathed to Ann Wiley, wife of the plaintiff below, William Wiley, by the will of her father James Walker, deceased. The plaintiffs filed no declaration, but made a written statement of their cause of action under the “ act to regulate arbi-trations and proceedings in courts of justice, passed the 21st of March, 1806.”
    The question was, Whether such a case fell within the provi-visions of the act of assembly?
    
      Stephens, for the plaintiffs in error.
    
      Gallagher, contra.
   Per Curiam.

By the fifth section of the act of the 21st of March, 1806, 4 Sm. L. 328, statements are authorized in all eases where suits are brought for the recovery of any debt founded on a verbal promise, book account, note, bond, penal or single bill, and which, from the amount thereof, may not be cognizable before a justice of the peace.” A legacy is not among the cases enumerated, nor is it founded on any kind of contract, so that it is not within the meaning of the act. It is the opinion of the court, therefore, that in this action, a declaration should have been filed; and, for want of it, the judgment was erroneous, and must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.  