
    SAYRE against ROSE.
    OF CERTIORARI.
    The action before the justice, was an action on the case, brought on an indenture; and a breach assigned for not schooling the plaintiff’s son. The cause of action in the state of demand was very vaguely set out; there was not sufficient matter contained in the state of demand, to show the liability of Mr. Sayer to the action of the father.
   By the Court.

Without taking notice of the insufficiency of the state of demand, the action cannot be sustained. The plaintiff below has misconceived his action, as the action is brought for a breach of covenant in an indenture; it ought to have- been an action of covenant.

Judgment reversed.

Cited in Sayre v. Inhbts. of Springfield, 8 Halst. 168.  