
    Hunt and Others v. M’Rea.
    Decided, Dec. 16th, 1819.
    u. Debt — Office Judgment — Finality—Writ of Inquiry A judgment at Rules in a Clerk’s office can not lawfully he made final, on a declaration in debt, for money lent, and not alledged to be founded on any specialty, bill or note in writing;' until a Writ of Enquiry has been awarded and executed.
    In this case an action of debt was instituted in the- Superior Court of Prince George County by John M’Rae against Charles Hunt and Daniel Dugger, formerly merchants and partners acting under the firm and style of Hunt and Dugger. The writ was not inserted in the transcript of the Record. The declaration was in debt for money lent; saying nothing of any contract in writing, A judgment was entered in the Clerk’s office, and confirmed, against the defendants and William Pren-tiss, serjeant of the town of Petersburg, ‘ ‘for five hundred and fifty dollars, with interest from the 7th day of October 1817, ’till paid, the debt in the declaration,” and costs: to which judgment the defendants and the Serjeant obtained a Writ of Supersedeas.
    
      
       The principal case is cited with approval in Shelton v. Welsh, 7 Leigh 177; James River K. R. Co. v. Lee, lGGratt. 427; Commercial Union Asso. Co. v.' Everhart, 88 Va. 955,14 S. E. Rep. 836.
    
   *The following was the opinion of this Court.

The Judgment is erroneous in this, that it, is made final on a declaration claiming a debt due for money loaned, and not alledged to be founded on any specialty, bill or note in writing. It is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded for a writ of enquiry to be executed, if the deféndant does not plead to issue; and with liberty to the Serjeant to shew if he can, that the defendant was improperly held to bail, and that he is not liable to the judgment; this Court not being able to judge thereof, as the Writ, with the endorsement, is not copied into the record.  