
    V. D. V. Jamison, Treasurer, against D. Rumph, Executor of James Carmichael.
    iimitatipnsutwm KiyeS'the^omtheds'Treasurer! state,'tSeleing no law to protect the State against thestatute.
    This action was brought on a note of hand, given by the defendant’s testator to the plaintiff as treasurer of the Board of Commissioners of the Roads ; to which the statute of limitations was pieaueu.
    On the part of the plaintiff it was contended that this was a case exempted from the operation of the statute of limitations, as a debt due to the public.
    The presiding Judge charged in favour of the defendant, and the plaintiff submitted to a non-suit, with leave to move to set it aside.
    The plaintiff now moved to set aside the non-suit, on the ground that this was a debt due to the public, against which the statute of limitations would not run.
   The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Nott.

It has already been decided by this Court, that a promissory note, given to the treasurer of the state, and for the use of the state, was not exempt from the operation of the statute of limitations, (Treasurer vs. Scarborough,) much less can the treasurer of the Commissioners of the Roads claim this high prerogative. If subordinate agents of the state undertake to give indulgence to persons indebted to them in be- ° . < half of the public, they must do it on their own responsibility. The defendant is sued as executor, and not in his own right. It is that class individuals to which the act of limitations was intended to be a shield. The motion, therefore, must be refused.

Grimké, CqIcocJc, Gantt, and Cheves, J. concurred.  