WELLsBURc, Va. Sent $.
{"character_count": 1231, "word_count": 215, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9681000113487244], "ccnet_perplexity": [2252.60009765625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
4 Aouel Cass.--B Broo6 Cotustp Court. '. Truesdell, US. R. Mcconnell and wife.

 his was an action of debt brought against husband and wife, on a note executed bv the Wlie before msffiage. The defendants pleaded hrst, payment, and secondly, that 'iia Vie vas II iunatlc at the time Of the ex- eeution oi the note. The plea of hluacv. the one upon which the defendants ral;e,i' was put in by the husband alone. The counsel for the plaintiff, instead of demur- ring to il, objected to the filing or reception of tho plea, upon tho grounds, that it was unprecedented; md also that il was mad missable upon the old common law princi- pie, that man shall moi he ner.a:..sh ..,;; stnltily himself; but the court ogerruled the objection and accepted the plea. Where upon the plaintiff took issue. The eyi- denee before the jury was conclusive, and consequently the verdict was for the dcien- dants.

 He call this novel case, because tho counsel for the plaintiff stated to the Court, that he had searched diligently, and had been unable to find precedent either in the English or American books; and the counsel for the defendants was also unable to produce precedent. An appeal to tho Circuit Court will probably be taken. Re- publican.