Cassell's Heirs v. Gazello's Ex'r

Opinion by

Judge Peters :

The court has read more than once the ingenious and plausible petition presented by counsel for appellants for a re-hearing, in which it is insisted that the acknowledgment of Cassell of his indebtedness to Gazello is not made to the latter, and there is no promise to him to pay the debt proved.

Counsel do not make distinction between a demand actually barred at the time the acknowledgment is made, and the acknowledgment of a subsisting debt at the time.

In Bell v. Rowland’s Adm’rs, Hard. 301, the earliest case in which the court entered upon a discussion of the statute…