
    Peter Berthon et al. against Mathias Keeley.
    Teste and return days of ji.fa. executed, amended by the prcecipe.
    
    Referred to and explained in 2 Binn. 183.
    Cited in 9 S. & R. 284 to show that where there is an erroneous teste of fieri facias, the execution is amendable.
    Rule to shew cause why the teste and return day of the ■fieri facias should not be amended by th% prcecipe.
    
    It appeared by the deposition of William H. Todd, attorney for the plaintiff, that the action had been several terms marked for trial, and that on the first day of March term 1804, the defendant’s attorney confessed judgment without any stay of execution ; that he directed his prcecipe to the prothonotary generally, to issue fi. fa. without mentioning any return day, as was his usual custom, but intending it to be returnable to the then next September term ; and that he had entered it in that man- * ner in *his own docket at the time; and that the error J arose from the prothonotary’s clerk mistaking his prcecipe and making it returnable on the second return day of March term 1804. Mr. Todd’s prcecipe and docket on inspection, agreed with the statement he had made: and Shoemaker v. Knorr, 1 Dali. 197, was cited as a case in point.
    Mr. Rawle for the defendant was called upon to shew cause : he said he could not object, nor would he consent to the amendment.
   Per Cur.

Let the rule be made absolute.  