
    Mudgett v. Park.
    Apartyis not confined, to twenty days after judgment is rendered against him by a justice of the peace, within which to sue out a writ of error.
    
      Appeal from, the Scott District Court.
    
    In this case judgment was rendered before a j ustice against defendant, on the 13th of April, 1855, and on the 17th of May, a writ of error issued on his affidavit to remove said proceedings into the District Court. In that court, on motion of plaintiff, the writ was quashed, because it was not issued, nor applied for, within twenty days after the judgment was rendered by the justice. Defendant appeals, and assigns this ruling for error.
    
      Cooh & Dillon, for the appellant.
    
      W. M Leffingiuell, for the appellee.
   Wright, C. J.

This same question was raised and decided in the case of Porter & Lucas v. Helmick, ante, 87, and according to the construction there given to the statute, this case must be reversed. We are unable to see upon what principle it is, under our law, a party is confined to twenty days after judgment within which to sue out his writ of error. It may seem unreasonable that the legislature should have left the time for bringing this writ, indefinite and unlimited. But that it has been so left, we think is clear. There is no period fixed in terms, and we see no room for holding, there is by any fair analogy. That there should be a limitation, clear and definite, cannot be doubted; but the evil and confusion resulting from the present state of the law, must be remedied by the legislature, and not by this court. We cannot make the law; our duty is to declare it.

Judgment reversed.  