
    Stephen Cooke v. William Myers.
    In debt, by the lessor against the assignee of the lessee, the plaintiff is not bound to show an assignment by deed acknowledged or proved and recorded agreeably to the fourth section of tho Act of 13th December, 1792, “for regulating conveyances.”
    Debt, for rent, by lessor against assignee of lessee.
    ‘The plaintiff produced a paper signed by the defendant, in which he agreed to take the residue of Thompson’s lease, and bound himself to Thompson in the penal sum of to pay all the rents which should become due to the plaintiff, Dr. Cooke, upon his lease to Thompson.
    
      Mr. Siuann, for the defendant,
    objected that it was not competent evidence to prove an assignment from Thompson to Myers, and cited the Act of Assembly, p. 165, (ed. 1803, p. 157.)
    
      Mr. Simms, for the plaintiff,
    cited 1 Esp. 247 (large ed. 220.) Cotes v. Wade, 1 Lev. 190; Pitt v. Russell, 3 Lev. 19, and Watson v. Alexander, 1 Wash. 351, and insisted that the paper produced was in this ease evidence proper and competent to go to the jury, to prove an assignment; and of such opinion was the Court.
   Mr. Swann took a bill of exceptions, but never carried the cause to the Supreme Court.  