
    Irwin and Vick vs. Sanders and Lane.
    When a warrant issued by a justice of the peace is defective, in not stating the Christian names of the plaintiffs, and an appeal is prayed and verdict be given for the plaintiff, and a new trial granted, the court may permit the warrant to be amended.
    It is error in a court to quash a warrant issued by a justice of the peace, after the same has been amended, for the defect so amended.
    When an amendment, by an insertion of the Christian names of the plaintiffs in a warrant, is made after an appeal prayed and the cause in court, the security in the appeal is discharged.
    On the sixteenth.of October 1829, a warrant issued in favour of Irwin and Vick, against Julius Sanders, to appear before a justice of the peace, &c. Which warrant having been executed and returned, a judgment for the plaintiffs was rendered on the seventh of November 1829; whereupon Sanders appealed to. the circuit court, and executed his bond with Alexander B. Lane, his security, in the penal sum of sixty dollars, to be void on condition he “prosecute” “an appeal by him prayed to the next circuit court,” &c. At the February term, 1830, the cause came on to be tried before the circuit court, and a verdict was rendered against Sanders, and a judgment pronounced against himself and Lane, his security for the appeal. The defendant moved the court, at the same term, to quash the warrant, which motion was continued until the February term, 1831, when the plaintiffs moved the court to set aside the verdict and judgment, which was accordingly done, whereupon they moved for and obtained leave to amend the warrant, by inserting their Christian names. This having been done, the parties agreed to set aside the order granting a new trial, which was done accordingly. Then the defendant’s motion to quash the warrant coming on to be argued, the court proceeded to quash the warrant and the proceedings thereon had, set aside the verdict and judgment, and permitted the defendant to go hence, &c. 'To reverse this judgment, the plaintiffs prosecute this writ of error.
   Green, J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

We think that after the new trial was granted in this cause, it was competent for the court to authorize the amendment of the warrant which was made, and without enquiring into the propriety of the motion to quash the proceedings after a verdict and judgment. We think it was erroneous to quash the proceedings after the amendment was made, and that the judgment must be reversed. But as the warrant was defective when the appeal from the justice was taken, and Lane became the security, and no judgment could rightly have been rendered against the defendant, the making the amendment discharged the security from all further liability. This court, therefore, rendering such judgment as the circuit court ought to have given, direct a judgment to be rendered against Sanders alone, upon the finding of the jury, and discharge the security.

Judgment reversed.  