
    THE STATE TO THE USE OF DOWDLE vs. B. WARD AL.
    The case of State v. King 8r at, 5 Ire.203, reviewed and the decision there made confirmed.
    Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Cherokee County, at the Spring Term, 1841, his Honor Judge Pearson presiding.
    This was an action of debt, brought at the instance of another relator, upon the same bond, which was sued upon in the case of the State upon the relation of John Hughes, decidedf at the December Term 1844, of this Court, and reported in 5 Ire. Rep. 203. The defendants pleaded non est factum, and upon the trial of the issues thereon joined, they raised several objections to the recovery of the relator, among which was one that the bond in question was never taken by any Court. The objections were all overruled by the presiding Judge, and the relator had a verdict and judgment, from which the defendant appealed.
    
      Francis, for the plaintiff.
    
      J. W. Woodjin and Baxter, for the defendants.
   Battle, J.

For the reasons given by the Court in the case of the State upon the relation of Hughes against the same defendants as those now before us, 5 Ire. Rep. 203, we deem the objection, that the bond was never taken by any Court, to be fatal to the relator’s right to recover in this action. The judgment must therefox-e be reversed and a venire de novo awarded.

Per Coriam. Judgment reversed and venire de novol

L  