
    [*] TUTTLE against Executors of AYRES.
    ON CERTIORARI.
    Action lies not against agent for his principal’s delinquency 
    
    The action below was founded on the following article of agreement:—
    Article of agreement between Moses Tuttle, in behalf of Joseph D’Camp on the one part, and Elisha Ayres on the other part, witnessoth: 'That whereas the said D’Camp has cut about one hundred cords of wood through mistake, on the said Ayres’ land, the said D’Camp agrees to and with the said Ayres to pay the said Ayres four dollars in cash in hand, and to let the said Ayres have as much timber near the said A.yres’ land, as shall make so much as the said D’Camp cut on the said Ayres’ land, be it more or less, and the timber and wood to stand for the use of the said Ayres and his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, for the full time of forty years if they, or any of them should require it.
    As witness our hands, this 8th day of April 1798.
    MOSES TUTTLE, in behalf of Joseph D’Camp.
    ELISHA AYRES.
    The breach assigned of this agreement, was, that neither D’Camp nor Tuttle had let Ayres in his lifetime, or his executors since his death, have said timber and wood, or any part thereof.
    
      
       S. P. South. 8%8. Vide % Kent's Corn. 49%.
      
    
   By the Court.

Tuttle is no way liable on this agreement ; it is the agreement of D’Camp, and so stated in the instrument, and although Tnttle signs his name to the instrument, yet he does it as the agent of D’Camp; the action cannot, therefore, be maintained in any shape against Tuttle; but even if it could, yet it is misconceived, it should have been an action on the case, and not an action of debt.

Judgment reversed.  