
    Robert H. H. Hester et ux. v. Edwin Bass.
    The 142d section of the act to regulate proceedings in the district court, as well as the 9th section of the statute of limitation, forbids that any writ of error shall he prosecuted after the expiration of two years from the rendition of the judgment. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 1496, p. 588; Art. 4616, Note 1026.)
    Error from Be Witt. The case was tried before Hon. Fieldin6 Jones, one of the district judges.
    Messrs. Parker Miller moved to dismiss the writ of error,
    because it was filed more than two years after the rendition of the judgment.
    Ho brief appears for or against the motion.
   Morrill, C. J.

Judgment was rendered in the district court on the 25th September, 1860. The act in force at that time provides that no writ of error shall be granted to any judgment after two years from the time such judgment shall have been made final; consequently a writ of error could not have been prosecuted after the 25th September, 1862.

As the petition for writ of error was not filed till the 29th March, 1866, upwards of five years after the rendition of the judgment, the motion of the defendant in error to strike the cause from the docket ought to prevail.

Ordered accordingly.  