busby plaintiff against hadderton defendant enter hill James b r rot a action  upon the case for a promise c in a action upon the case for a promise upon non  assumpsit plead a verdict be find for the plaintiff and upon a motion in  arrest of judgement the case appear to be this the plant sell unto the def a  parcel of sugar at d ob the pound who in toto see atting to so much afterward  the pl sell unto he another Bulstrode parcel for so much quod in toto see  moisten to such a sum and afterward the plaintiff sum up all together with  this who in toto see moisten to such a sum in consideration of all which the  defendant do assume and promise to pay this unto the plaintiff which last sum  in the last cast up qum in toto see moisten to so much be I will more than the  two former sum true cast up amount unto the promise be to pay the last sum as  it be cast up in which the mistake be and this be move in arrest of judgement  for that this do not now appear for to be one and the same contract because  that I will more be in the last cast up who in toto see moisten to such a sum  than be in fact in the two former sum and therefore it be urge by Geo croak  for the defendant that for this cause judgement ought to be arrest and to the  same purpose he remember a case adjudge here in this court but afterward  reverse by a writ of error in the exchequer Chamber and that upon this reason  because that the sum cast up in the last total which be promise to be pay be  less by a penny than the other several sum true cast up amount unto and so  this appear not to be the same contract and for this reason the judgement be  reverse and the same reason be here for the arrest of this judgement there the  last total in the cast up be a penny less than the former sum and here in this  case the last total in the cast up be I Id more than the former sum but we  reason be the same in both casesWilliarns justice it be very clear that these  word in the last total who in toto see moisten to so much be word mere  superabundant if the several sum before be the ground and consideration of the  promise to pay be cast up right forlbat the assumpsit to pay have relation to  the other several sum for which the good be deliver the like case be here in  this court adjudge be one Lantons case and affirm upon a writ of error in the  excheq Chamber where like variance be in the cast up of the last total the  former sum be right and this be hold to be amendable and be here amend and the  last total amend and make for to agree with the other sum and so this variance  and mistake here in this case in the cast up of the last total be amendable  and ought to be amend and make to agree with the other sum which be right cast  up croak justice the contract here have reference unto the parcel before name  in particular and if it appear in the cast up of the last total who in toto  see moisten to so much be the same more or less than the beforenamed  particular sum do amount unto then this non be idem but a several contract  Fleming chief justice the assumpsit here be the ground and cause of the action  and therefore if one in consideration of a horse of price deliver to he do  promise to pay unto he for the horse this be true and good and this his  promise shall bind he to pay the and it may be so here in this case if the  promise be to pay so much here as by the cast up of the last total it be say  to be this will then bind he to the performance thereof and as to the  amendment where a mistake be in the cast up of the total this be true as it  have be observe and the same be matter amendable in many such like case but  herein this difference be to be observe where the plaintiff frame his  declaration accord to a account of particular sum take by himself and where it  be by the party which do assume to pay for the several commodity deliver quod  in toto see Bulstrode er p moisten to such a sum wherein the mistake be if it  be by the party himself and there be more cast up in the last total than in  the former this be not idem nor yet amendable but otherwise it be where the  same so be do by the party which do assume Yelverton justice put the case to  be without any such cast up with a who in toto see moisten to so much as if  one do sell a horse to another for ten pound or a ox for five pound and for  this he promise to pay he twenty pound clear this be good and he shall be bind  to performance by this his promise the difference be good which have be take  where the variance and mistake be the default of the clerk in cast up of the  sum and so mistake in the total this be matter amendable and the same have be  usual amend but otherwise it be where the variance and mistake be mere the  default of the party himself in cast up of the total this be not amendable but  Bulstrode this case now here in question do something differ for that the  former sum which the parcel deliver amount unto be cast up right in the how in  toto see moisten but the mistake be in the cast up of all together in the last  and general total this may in reason be amend and make to agree with the  former sum which be cast up right if the precedent of the court will warrant  itMan secondary inform tl e court that he have precedent direct in the point  for amendment of such mistake of the party in cast up of the last total where  the former sum be right upon the produce of which president this mistake in  cast up of the last total be by the rule of the court amend and make to agree  with the former sum and by the rule of the court judgement be enter for be  plaintiff