
    FORD FOR USE OF PATTERSON v. HAFT, COLE AND LINDSAY.
    Covenant on a note, signed and sealed as follows:
    J. Haet, [seal.]
    Cole and Lindsay, [seal.]
    Plea — non est factum, without affidavit.
    
      J. Collier, for the plaintiff,
    
      offered to read the note in evidence.
    
      R. Marsh objected, a variance.
    The declaration describes the note as sealed with the seals of H., C. & L. by the name and style of C. & L.; the note shows Haft’s seal, and Cole and Lindsay’s seal.
    
   BY THE COURT.

There is no affidavit to the plea, and if the note is substantially described, it may be read. Though Cole and Lindsay cannot have a common seal, yet each may have used the same seal, and made it his. The note may go in evidence; but whether, unexplained, it will avail the plaintiff, is another question.

The note was then read. A witness was called, who proved the signature of Cole and Lindsay to be the writing of Cole, and his act alone.

The plaintiff rested. The defendant moved for a non suit.

BY THE COURT. The plaintiff cannot recover. He has sued three upon an obligation of two.

Non suit ordered. See Button & Freeman v. Hampson, et al. Ante 94.

[Attaching seal does not vitiate note; Johnson v. Nelson, 3 W. L. M. 306, 310.]  