Bulstrode Papworth plaintiff against johnson defendant action upon the case  for a promise against a executor in a action upon the case for a promise bring  against the defendant executor of I S upon his promise to pay a debt which be  owe by the testator unto the plaintiff if he will forbear the same until the  will be prove for non payment whereof the action bring upon non assumpsit  plead a verdict be give for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement  that the declaration be not good for that therein be declare general and set  forth that whereas the testator be in his life time indebt unto he in such a  sum but do not show how the debt do grow due the defendant the executor in  consideration that he will forbear the same until the will be prove he promise  then to pay it the exception take because the plaintiff do not show in this  his declaration for what cause this Molly do first grow due unto he for that  it may grow due for such a cause as that the executor may not be charge with  payment thereof and if so then as it be urge his promise to pay this upon  forbearance will be to no purpose and it be urge that the assumpsit by a  executor upon a general indebitatus of the testator be not good it be urge for  the plaintiff that the declaration be good without show how the debt do grow  due from the testator this be but as a inducement to the action and that the  defendant by this promise have confess the debt and so by his promise admit  himself to be Chargeable therewith dodderidge and Haugh tun justice he ought  here to have show in his declaration how the debt grow due for it may grow  upon a simple contract and so the executor not to be charge with the same  dodderidge justice a executor shall not be charge upon a simple contract of  the testator though he have asset in his hand to pay Haughton justice if this  be not a debt that will charge the executor the first consideration then fail  and a promise then to pay this upon forbearance will not charge he so at this  time the court seem to be of opinion that the declaration be not good for the  omission therein Bulstrode er p in not show how the debt by the testator to  the plaintiff do grow due and so for this time it be adjourn afterward this  case be move again Haughton justice the consideration here lie in this  declaration be the debt of the testator due to the plaintiff and the promise  to pay this by the executor upon forbearance this ought to be a debt  sufficient to charge the executor by law to pay it or his promise will not  bind he nor any way hurt he this ought to be show in the declaration this do  not appear to we to be so and therefore the plaintiff can here have his  judgement if he have show the same to be a debt upon a general indebitatus for  a debt for ware sell by the plaintiff to the testator this have be good  dodderidge justice the case here be a action upon the case upon a assumpsit  against a executor upon his promise to pay unto the plaintiff a debt due unto  he from the testator and this promise so make in consideration of forbearance  for some time he promise to pay a debt to the plaintiff whereas by law he be  not to be charge with this debt whether this his assumpsit shall make he now  to be Chargeable with payment of this which he be not liable to pay by law as  to this particular point he and the court desire to see precedent in case of  executor Elizabeth one stone case a precedent show to be adjudge that such a  action do not lie against a executor upon his promise to pay if it be not  particular show express in the declaration how the debt grow due and not  general as here in this case Fleming chief justice if one be indebt to I S in  and die a action bring against his executor and show the debt how it grow due  the executor plead nil debet and find against he in consideration of  forbearance Bulstrode be then assume to pay the same whether this will not now  make he Chargeable as take it in this manner upon himself in this principal  case the meaning may be to have forbearance till the will be prove and then it  may appear how the matter stand clear the plaintiff here ought to show in his  declaration sufficient matter to charge the defendant as executor with payment  of the debt demand or his assumpsit to pay the same will not bind he so to do  afterward a precedent be show to the court by Harris for the plaintiff where a  executor be charge with such a promise by he make to pay a debt due by his  testator without show the same to be such a debt as in law will charge he the  court then answer that if the other side do not find and show other precedent  to the contrary they will then give their judgement accord to this precedent  then produce and show in court and so the court advice they to search further  for precedent and in the interim this cause be adjourn to another time  afterward termin mich James b r the court be move again in this case and some  precedent produce and show in court as Hillar James rot sir Richard Westons  case and coke pa foe Pinchons case that upon such a simple contract a action  of debt lie against executor show for what the same do grow due and coke pars  fol William bane case action sur Le case against a executor upon promise to  pay upon forbearance needs not to aver that there be asset to pay the executor  charge by the promise Henry Yelverton as to sir Richard Westons case remember  there it appear to be for money and then it must be agree to be so as it be  urge but that differ from this case here diverse case have be since resolve  that the plaintiff in his declaration ought certainty to show for what the  debt by the testator do grow due or the declaration not good and Norwood read  case in Plowdens commentary fol be likewise cite the executor charge with the  assumpsit of the testator Haughton justice where the assumpsit be upon a  indebitatus assumpsit by the testator such a action upon the case upon a  indebitatus assumpsit by the testator lie not against the executor and of this  we be all clear agree but here in this case this do not grow due upon such n  indebitatus assumpsit but upon a collateral promise make by the executor  George croak if a action be bring upon a general indebitatus this be not good  without show the cause of the debt for what cause the same do grow due and as  touch this there have be two judgement since James the one a case concern  Coventry the other here in London a declaration upon a indebitatus assumpsit  bring hither by writ of error and the declaration resolve to he have for want  of show therein for what cause the debt grow due the other in London before  Walmeslev and Tanfield and both of they here reverse by writ of error and for  this Bulstrode er p cause only Haughton justice Indebitatus assumpsit general  not good this have be oftentimes condemned because there be no certainty of  the debt appear on the record indebitatus this be to be prove before in  consideration of forbearance promise to pay dodderidge justice this be not  here upon a indebitatus assumpsit but whereas there be such a debt owe and  this be uncertain till it be show to be so then the defendant say if the  plaintiff will forbear he to prove the will or to take administration he do  assume to pay the same this be clear a good consideration to charge he here  upon his special promise the plaintiff have forbear he accord and the  precedent show of James ought to rule and direct we in our judgement unless  the other side can show we precedent to the contrary indebitatus a lu sit  general have be hold have the reason of it be this because it be not know nor  do appear how this debt come to be due and in regard it may be by bind or by  simple contract and so there may be a double remedy and therefore hold not  good the court upon view of the precedent show be satisfy that the declaration  here be good and so by the rule of the court judgement be give and so enter  for the plaintiff