case Huddi ux administrator of William Gifford vers I yate Gifford in c b upon  a writ of error bring after judgement in a action upon a bind with condition  for the payment of money only execution ought not to be stay if bail be not  find vin Abr title supersedeas c pl Richard bring king b p Crompt bring this  be a action of debt upon a bind give by the defendant to the intestate date  the that of April upon oyer of the bind it appear that the condition recite  that William Gifford be bind with the defendant for a debt of the defendant by  bind of the same date to pay S to lat Ridley on the that of October then next  if therefore the defendant pay to the say Latimer Ridley the say S on the say  that of October in discharge of the say recite obligation then c the defendant  plead quod to loosen pillage S pillage lat Ridley super Oct in exoneration  read aloud oblige the plaintiff reply quod non to loosen to which there be a  demurrer and judgement for the plaintiff after judgement the defendant bring a  writ of error and do not find bail upon which the plaintiff sue out execution  for that by the statute make perpetual by the saint car c S and the saint car  c S a James c it be enact that no execution shall be delay by writ of error or  supersedeas thereon for reverse any judgement in any action or bill of debt  upon any single bind for debt or upon any obligation with condition for  payment of any money only or upon any action or bill of debt for rend or upon  any contract in any court of Westminster c unless the person in who name error  be bring with two surety first become bind by recognizance c to he or who  judgement be give in double the sum recover to prosecute the writ of error  with effect c and it be insist by sergeant Whitaker that bail be not require  here for that this obligation be in the nature of comens a obligation to  indemnify which will not be within the statute which ought to be take strict  and therefore if error be bring in a action of debt upon a bind for the  performance of covenant Even if one of the covenant be for the payment of  money because the statute require that it shall be for the payment of money  only Carth bail be not require neither in debt upon a bind for the performance  of a award or for the payment of upon the return of a ship comb S c a I show  and for the same reason it be not require in this case for if the defendant  have tender the money to Ridley on the day of payment in a action of debt  bring by Ridley against he upon the bind be may have plead this tender and  refusal but to this condition be can not plead it   Litt a and this point be  determine in b r hill Geo in the case between Mod b Hammond and web when the  condition recite a former bind give by the defendant to a and then go on if  the say web shall pay the say sum of to the say a on the that of April then c  in the same word as the present case and the court be of opinion that bail be  comens er p not necessary for it be of the same nature with a bind to  indemnify though no judgement be enter up in that case because the plaintiff  affirm his judgement on the writ of error but on the other side it be urge  that this bind be only for the payment of money and so without doubt within  the letter of the statute but bind for performance of covenant award c or for  payment of money upon the return of a ship on ait be determine in the case of  Pitt v cony Str where the plaintiff have recover on a bottomreebond and the  defendant have bring a writ of error without put in bail that the contingency  have happen it be in every respect a bind for the payment of money only and  therefore that bail be necessary bottomreecontract or to indemnify be out of  the letter of the Act and therefore there be good reason that bail shall not  be require upon a writ of error in such action but where the bind be within  the word of the statute this statute have be construe beneficial for the  subject and therefore where there be a condition for the payment of such a sum  of money to b as a shall declare to be due from the defendant to he upon a  account state between the plaintiff and defendant it be resolve that bail be  necessary in a writ of error by three judge against Kelyng keb S c a lev  comens so in a action against a executor or administrator if judgement be  general against he de good not common with others and be bring a writ of error  he must find bail Bulst S c b cro side keb lev S c cro car c and the case  between Hammond and web be not determine for no judgement be give and  therefore nothing appear but that the court doubt upon this point the Ch I  king seem to think that this case be within the letter of James and he think  that this statute ought to have a liberal construction but because the judge  of the king bench doubt and incline to the contrary opinion that there may be  one uniform opinion in the two court it be agree to be put off till the court  can talk with the judge of the king bench and in the last day but one of the  term the chief justice deliver the opinion of the court and say that this  court be agree that execution ought not to be stay in this case if bail be not  find for the statute ought to be construe liberal and for the benefit of he  who have obtain judgement and that no judgement be give in the case of Hammond  and web and therefore the rule for stay execution be discharge