
    *Harris vs. Linnard and Jennings. [*58
    If a. second writ of attachment is sued out between the same parties, in the •same county, during the pendency of a former attachment, the second writ .-of attachment will be quashed.
    
      A writ of attachment had been issued in this case to the sheriff of the county of Salem, and returned to the term of May last, and a second writ of attachment was sued out by the same plaintiff against the same defendant, placed in the hands of the sheriff of the same county, and returned to the-term of September.
    
      D. Elmer
    
    now moved to quash the second writ of attachment, and contended that there could not be two attachments against the same person in the same county at the same time.
   Per Curiam.

The second writ of attachment must be-quashed. There is no reason that there should be, at the-same time, two attachments between the same parties in the same county. When they are issued into different counties, upon the return of the writ, they proceed as one suit; ' But it is not so here; and the court have no authority to consolidate them as in other cases.

Second writ of attachment quashed;  