bodily versus Bellamy Saturday d Nov SC black Indian interest when make  principal here bear English interest see h Bl yes jun Bosanq yes durn brown  vide Str burr bull sider durn Mr Norton on behalf of the plaintiff show cause  against a rule which have be obtain by Mr Morton of counsel for the defendant  for the plaintiff to show cause why upon payment of the whole penalty of the  bind together with all the cost in this court and also the cost of the writ of  error bring upon the judgement give by this court the execution shall not be  stay and satisfaction enter upon the record burrow the case be very particular  it be a action bring here in this court upon a bind give at Calcutta in Bengal  in the east Indies where both party then reside and where the plaintiff still  reside but the defendant be in England at which place Calcutta the allow  interest be per cent which be the rate Payable by the condition of the bind on  which the present action be bring the declaration be in debt for S d it  contain two count one be upon the bind for the penalty of rupee of Calcutta of  the value of S of lawful money of great Britain the other be upon a P  of  mutuor for rupee of the value of S d residue of the say sum of S d the  plaintiff lie his damage at the plea be non be factum as to the first count  and nil debet as to the second the action be bring in and the cause be try  before Lord Mansfield in Michaelmas term upon the trial the bind be prove but  no evidence at all be give upon the second count of any money lend to the  defendant nor have he in fact borrow any burrow er p other money of the  plaintiff than the very sum for which he give the bind notwithstanding which  the verdict be take through mistake or inadvertency for the plaintiff general  upon both count and the judgement be enter accord and remain unimpeached at  the time of the judgement the penalty of the bind be sufficient to have answer  the whole of the debt interest and cost then incur but the defendant have  affect very great delay in various method he have bring a bill in equity for a  injunction and have take exception to the answer and hinder the get the  injunction dissolve till Hilary term when after argue the exception it be  dissolve on the merit he then immediate bring a writ of error in the exchequer  Chamber mere for delay and assign the common error then he plead nul tiel  record to the to know facias upon the judgement so that he prevent the  plaintiff from sign his final judgement till the that day of this very month  nine day ago these delay have cost much time and money too as the cost tax  always fall short of the cost out of pocket and the interest run on the case  be so alter that at this time the penalty of the bind burrow alone be become  insufficient by about l to answer the total of the debt interest and cost now  incur it be thereforeinsisted by Mr Norton on behalf of the plaintiff that the  court will not interfere to give their assistance to the defendant contrary to  the plain clear obvious justice of the case he admit that if no evidence be  give at the trial on the second count of any money borrow by the defendant of  the plaintiff there shall indeed have be a verdict take for the defendant upon  that count and it be a mistake to neglect it but he be too late to complain of  that mistake now if he have complain in proper time the penalty of the bind  will then have answer the plaintiff whole demand at that timedue to he but as  the defendant have wilful and obstinate delay the plaintiff till the case be  much otherwise he have no pretence to apply to the court to stop the plaintiff  take out his execution upon the judgement as it now stand Lord MansfieldIt be  admit that there be a mistake in the take this verdict and consequent in the  judgement it may be proper then first to consider what be the fair honest  justice of the case and whether the plaintiff can come at it although this  mistake shall be rectify if he can it be to no purpose for the defendant to  desire it to be rectify his wise way will be to make satisfaction immediate  without more expense the plaintiff do not insist to avail himself of the  mistake in the verdict and judgement beyond his just demand the plaintiff be  in justice entitle to recover the sum real lend to the defendant together with  Indian interest till the sign of the judgement but with only the legal  interest of this country which be no more than five per cent from the time of  the liquidation of the debt by the judgement the plaintiff have be keep out of  his money by a writ of error bring after a verdict be entitle to a  satisfaction for this damage under the statute of car which oblige the  plaintiff in error to give security as well for damage as cost or he may bring  a action of debt on the judgement and have damage pro detentions debt is owed  there be four court all include under the same Act of parliament to which writ  of error may be make returnable namely the house of lord the court hold burrow  before the Lord chancellor and treasurer and judge under Edward for examine  erroneous judgement in the exchequer the court of exchequerchamber hold before  the judge of the common plea and baron of the exchequer under Elizabeth c for  examine into error in the judgement of this court and this court itself for  correct the error of the king bench in Ireland common plea here and other  court in the first of these the house of lord they give sometime very large  some V car stat S N B this be confine to cause not commence here by original  for where the action commence in this court by original the writ of error be  returnable in parliament burrow er p time very small cost in their discretion  accord to the nature of the case and the reasonableness or unreasonableness of  litigate the judgement of the court below in the second it be do by the Lord  chancellor or Lord keeper personal and the practice be to give interest from  the day of sign the judgement to the day of affirm it there compute accord to  the current not accord to the strict legal rate of interest in the three the  exchequerchamber the course be for the officer to settle it unless any  particular direction be give by the court and he in tax the cost allow double  the money out of pocket or thereabouts but add no interest in this court upon  writ of error from c b c the officer tax the cost of affirmance and tax they  in the same manner as he tax other cost though somewhat more liberal but our  officer never have any regard to interest nor allow it as of course the court  themselves have sometime indeed order interest to be compute on the sum  liquidate by the judgement below one instance of this be in the case of the  bishop of London and lewen against the mercer company and be mention in  strange that be a writ of error upon a quare hinder and the judgement below be  for for half a year value of the church and for a writ to the bishop which  judgement have be affirm here the defendant in error move in easter term g for  cost and damage on h c and they will have have the damage compute accord to  the value of the church during the time of their be keep out of their  presentation the court after deliberation agree that it be in their discretion  to settle the quantum of damage but they do not think it right to give damage  to the patron in proportion to the profit of the benefice because he himself  will not have be entitle to receive they they declare therefore that the  measure they go by be the interest of the money recover the legal interest  from the time of bring the writ of error to the time of affirm the judgement  and they direct the master to compute the damage burrow accord videlicet legal  interest upon the recover and to add it to the cost so here in the present  case interest ought to be pay after the rate of per cent accord to the Indian  allowance till the ascertainment of the sum to be pay by sign the judgement  and from that time till the actual payment of the money after the rate of per  cent only upon the accumulate sum ascertain by the judgement for that be the  real damage which the plaintiff have sustain by the delay of his execution and  the detention of his debt the justice of the case be plain and the law be  agreeable to it Mr Morton agree that his client the defendant bad better  acquiesce in pay the plaintiff what be just and fair due to he voluntary and  without further litigation than to render himself liable to the cost of  another action wherefore he give up his present motion and no rule be take  upon it