
    Stackhouse against Halsey.
    
      October 24.
    Where the statute directs the advertisement for the sale of mortgaged prem ises to be published “once a week for six successive months,” lunar, not calendar months, are intended.
    BILL to set aside a sale of mortgaged premises, unde? a power contained in the morgtage.
    The cause was submitted on the bill and answer,
    
      Wyman, for the plaintiff.
    
      Maxwell, for the defendant.
   The single point was, whether the words of the statute directing the advertisement of the sale “once a week for six successive months,” meant calendar or lunar months.

The Chancellor

ruled that lunar months were understood here, and in all" cases, in statutes, where months' are mentioned, and there is nothing in particular to indicate that calendaT months were intended, in contradistinction to the other. The cases of Lacon v. Hooper, (6 Term Rep. 224.) and of Talbot v. Linfield, (1 Wm. Blackstone’s Rep. 450.) were referred to. 
      
       Vide Loring v. Halling, 15 Johns. Rep. 119. S. P. Leffingwell v. Pierpoint, 1 Johns. Cases, 100. Jackson v. Clark, 7 Johns. Rep. 217.
     