case Milward against ignorant to assumpsit upon a indebitatus and a quantum to  deserve for fifty pound the defendant may plead that after the promise and  before the action there be a account state between he and the plaintiff and  upon his promise to pay the balance the plaintiff promise to release S C Mod  S C Freem Indebdatus assumpsit for fifty pound and quantum to deserve the  defendant confess modern er p both but plead that after the promise make and  before the action bring they come to a account concern diverse sum of money  and that he be find in arrear to the plaintiff thirty shilling whereupon in  consideration the defendant promise to pay he the say thirty shilling the  plaintiff likewise promise to release and acquit the defendant of all demand  the plaintiff demurrer seys sergeant argue for the plaintiff that though one  promise may be discharge by another yet a duty certain can as in this case  where a demand be of a sum certain by the indebitatus beside this plea be in  nature of a accord which can be good without a averment of satisfaction give  bro account neither be it say that the plaintiff promise in consideration that  the defendant ad earnestness of the plaintiff have promise modern Hopkins  sergeant answer and admit to be true that where a matter be plead by way of  accord it must be aver to be execute in all point but that be not the present  case the defendant have plead first that be and the plaintiff have account  together and so the contract be go by the account second that he be discharge  of the contract by parole both which the plaintiff have now admit by his  demurrer and it will not be deny that a parole discharge of a plank sit be  good as where a promise to perform a voyage within a time limit and the breach  be assign that he do not go the voyage the defendant plead that the plaintiff  to free the dawn and upon demurrer it be hold good Edward pl Henry pl if it be  object that it be no consideration to pay a just debt for if thirty shilling  be due of right it ought to be pay and that can be no reason upon which to  ground a promise I answer it be a good consideration to pay money on the day  which the party be bind to upon bind because it be pay without suit or trouble  which may be otherwise a loss to the plaintiff but in this case here be a  express agreement and before there be only a contract in law cro car flight v  Crasden north chief justice it have be always take that if there be a  assumpsit to do a thing and there be no breach of the promise that it may be  discharge by parole but if it be once break then it can be discharge without  release in a write in this case there be two demand in the declaration to  which the defendant plead a account state so that the plaintiff can never  after have recourse to the first contract which be thereby merge in the  account if a sell his horse to b for ten pound and there be diverse other deal  between they they come to a account upon the whole and b be find in arrear  five pound a must bring his accuse compuNsset for he can never recover upon a  indebitatus assumpsit and of the same opinion be the other three justice and  though it be not say ad earnestness of the plaintiff that be promise yet it be  ad tunc Elizabeth bidem and so shall be intend that the defendant make the  promise at the instance of the plaintiff and so judgement be give for the  defendant