Astley and reynolds when a pawn broker receive more interest than he be  entitle to how far a indebitatus assumpsit will lie in order to recover it  back again the trial of this cause have come on before the chief justice at  nisi prius a case be draw up special for the opinion of the court the case be  that upon the that of October the defendant lend the plaintiff upon the pledge  of a piece of plate and no agreement be make about interest afterward on the  that of October the plaintiff go to redeem his plate and ask the defendant  what be due to he for interest the defendant insist upon the plaintiff refuse  to give it he but tender he the principal with l for interest upon the  defendant not agree to it he go away but on the that of February follow come  again and tender the principal and l for interest as before the defendant  insist then likewise upon ten pound for interest and upon that the plaintiff  pay it he know the same to be more than legal interest and now bring his  action of indebitatus assumpsit for so much money have and receive to his use  for what be beyond the legal interest upon the trial the plaintiff obtain a  verdict subject to the opinion of the court upon the case which have be state  Mr reeves be counsel for the plaintiff and submit it for a principle know and  certain that if a man pay money in his own wrong by mistake a indebitatus  assumpsit will lie for that money he apprehend likewise the law to be clear  that if a man pay money to another free to do a wicked act a act which be  malum in see Barnardiston king b a indebitatus assumpsit will lie for that  money and to this purpose be cite the case of Wilkenson and kitchen Trin W  there money be give to a solicitor to lie out in bribe the solicitor do lie it  out so and a action be notwithstanding bring against he for so much money have  and receive to the party use there be a considerable debate whether that  action will lie and hold to be maintainable but he do not conceive this action  to be so difficult to maintain as that for there the party pay his money  voluntary but here he be force to do it for he can not get his good without it  and in roll Abr it be hold that duress upon a man good shall as much avoid  even his deed as duress upon his person Mr fazakerly on the other side argue  and say he do agree that wherever a man pay money by a mistake a indebitatus  assumpsit will lie but he do submit it the rule of law be that wherever a man  pay money know what he do he shall never recover it back again willing non fit  in an unjust manner be a principle of law as well as common reason and for  this purpose he cite salk skin Mod he say he do think it to be a very hard  thing to maintain that here be coercion in this case the defendant indeed  insist upon the money but the plaintiff take a long time to consider of it and  afterward pay it he observe too that it may be doubt whether the plaintiff  have any right to the plate upon the tender that he make the tender of l be a  tender of more than legal interest which the defendant be not oblige to accept  and if he have accept it he may have be punish for it the tender therefore he  submit it be void and if so the plaintiff can not have recover his good even  in a action of trover he say far that he conceive the position maintain by the  other side of a man recover back money which he have pay upon a illegal  consideration not to be law he say if a man give money to beat another he  believe it be never hear of that a indebitatus assumpsit will lie and it have  be even determine that it will not for interest pay that be usurious the giver  and receiver be both involve in the gild and therefore the giver shall not  have assistance from the law to recover the money out of the hand of the  receiver and he say it have always be take for know law that these action will  not lie even for money steal the court declare their opinion very free that  the tender be well make they think the tender of more than be due must be a  tender of that which be due though they do agree a tender of less will not and  judge page Barnardiston king b er p say that he believe it have be determine  that if a man throw a bag of money lose upon a table and bid the other take  what be his due that be a good tender but the great difficulty which stick  with the court be whether as this case be the action of indebitatus assumpsit  will lie the chief justice say if the case cite out of roll be law it be a  pretty strong authority to maintain the action he own he have some doubt of it  however incline to be of opinion that it will lie single upon this  Barnardiston king b consideration that there be something of a force put upon  the plaintiff judge page say he take it there be something of deceit as well  as a force and if the party pay the money any may upon a surprise he take it  clear the action will lie for then it will fall within the common case where a  attorney deliver a bill and the client pay it yet if the client be overcharge  he shall recover the overplusmoney in a indebitatus assumpsit though he do not  apply to have the bill tax and he believe he remember the first action of that  sort that be maintain judge probin say likewise that he think there be  something of a deceit as well as a force in this case for the plaintiff borrow  the principal sum upon the credit that he be to pay only common interest  afterward the defendant will be for draw he to pay a great interest judge lee  however declare his opinion to be that here be neither a deceit put upon the  party nor a force he say he take it that the plaintiff plain know what he do  he have full time to consider of it and therefore he think this case fall  within the common rule of willing non fit in an unjust manner the court think  this a matter of considerable consequence as well as difficulty for they say  if this action can be maintain it will be a much more easy remedy than to  bring a action of trover for the good and therefore think it deserve to be far  consider of so it be order to stand over for the opinion of the court but the  last day of the term they give judgement for the plaintiff with liberty to  enter it up nunc pro tunc