
    Northrop against Minturn.
    A note given for the use of a billard table, is not illegal, unless it appear to whom the note was given kept a tavern (1 N. R. L. 178, 179.)
    
    ERROR, on a certiorari to a justice’s court.
    
      Minturn brought a suit against Northrop, on a promissory note given by Northrop to Minturn, for 25 dollars. The defence was, that the note was given for a gaming debt. In support of the plea, the defendant below produced a witness, who swore, “ that, at the time when the note was given, Minturn admitted that 8 dollars of the note was for a ball-bill, and the residue for the use of a billiard table: but that he knew nothing of Northrop’s gaming.”
    There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff below, foF the whole amount of the note.
   Per Curiam.

Supposing the true construction of the evidence to be, that part of the consideration of the note was for the use of a billiard table, in playing billiards at the house of Minturn ; yet, as there is no evidence that Minturn then kept a tavern, it was not an unlawful contract; there being no evidence that it was for money lost at play.

The judgment below must fee affirmed.  