consequences of it, or apply to the legislature of Georgia for redress.

Wade

V.

Barnwell.

The judges after duly considering the circumstances of the case submitted to them by this special verdict, were unanimously of opinion, that the judgment should be rendered up for the defendant John Barnwell. The jus postliminium, upon which this case turns, and by virtue of which, things taken by an enemy are to be restored to their former state or owners, when a country comes again under the power of the nation to which it formerly belonged, is a very important branch of the law of nations, and is founded on the obligation which every sovereign or state is under, to protect the persons and goods of its subjects or citizens against an enemy; should any fortunate event bring it again under such sovereign power, he is bound to restore them to their former state, and to give back the effects to the owners to whom they originally belonged, and to settle every thing as they were before they fell into the enemies hands. Hence Gro. book 3 it is, therefore, that a private individual acquires a right to Vattel, lib. 3. every thing which belonged to him before they were taken by chap. 14. an enemy, as soon as a country comes again under the power or dominion of the sovereign to whom he is a subject, or owes allegiance. This postliminary right is of very ancient origin, and seems to have been respected by all nations, from the days of the ancient Greeks and Romans, down to the present day. It would ill become a young people, therefore, just taking their rank and station among the nations of the world, to disregard so important a principle of the national law. And however we may be disposed to respect the acts and proceedings of our sister states, as municipal regulations, yet whenever they come in contact with, or in opposition to, the governing code of nations, we are bound to say they must give way.

Let judgment be entered for defendant.

Present, GRIMKE, WATIES and BAY.

Charleston District, 1799.

If a verdict is delivered in

WILLIAM SHAW ads. ROBERT M'COMBS.

SLANDER. This was a case tried at Cambridge, in

Sunday which the jury gave 1,000 dollars damages. morning after the expiration of the twelfth hour,it is void, and will be a good ground

A motion was made for a new trial, and by consent it was argued at Charleston, instead of Columbia. The prinfor a new tri- cipal grounds were, 1st. Excessive damages; and, 2d. That to the com- the jury did not deliver in their verdict until Sunday morning.

al, agreeable

mon law max

minicus,, non

dicus.

im, dies do- There was another ground, to wit, misconduct in the jury est dies juri- in eating and drinking at the expense of the plaintiff, after they had gone out to consider of their verdict. But the ground on which the defendant chiefly relied, was the second ground; that the verdict was not delivered into court until a considerable time after the hour of adjournment; and to substantiate this fact, a certificate of the clerk was produced under the seal of the court, which stated that the verdict was not delivered in by the jury until some time on Sunday morning, a considerable time after twelve o'clock, the hour limited by law for the conclusion of the term.

It was then urged in support of the motion, that this ver dict ought to be set aside, on this ground alone, if there was no other to support the motion; that the act of the legisla ture authorized the court to meet at Cambridge, in NinetySix district, on the 16th days of April and November in each year, and to set ten days, or until the business of the court was finished. But it is a well known rule of the cominon law, that the Lord's day, commonly called Sunday, is not a day in law, dies dominicus, non est dies juridicus; consequently, all temporal business transacted on that day, is null and void, as it is set apart by our holy religion, for the worship of the Almighty, and the necessary preparations for that purpose. The court it was said, might sit till the last minute of the twelfth hour, but no longer.

Shaw

ads.

The judges without further argument, or hearing any thing said on the other grounds, set aside the verdict and M'Combs. ordered a new trial on this ground alone.

Present, BURKE, GRIMKE, WATIES and BAY.

WILLIAM SKIRVING against Executors of JAMES STOBO.

Charleston District,1799.

No interest is recoverable on open

book accounts

or any unli

ASSUMPSIT for the use and occupation of a house. In this case, the jury assessed a sum for the annual rent of the house in question, but allowed no interest on the different sums so fixed for the rent after the expiration of each year, although the presiding judge, WATIES, charged them ous to the to that effect.

This was a motion for a new trial, on the ground, that the interest was recoverable on each year's rent, after it became due; and also, because it was a finding against the direction and charge of the judge.

But the judges, after hearing arguments, refused the motion, observing, that this was an unliquidated demand, and no express promise to pay interest after the end of each year, was proved. That it was a matter sounding entirely in damages, which were not ascertained till the finding of the jury, and that too on a quantum valebat; therefore the principle of the cases in the English books, which says interest shall be allowed on all liquidated sums, will not apply in this case; for there was no liquidation here, until the finding of the jury, and upon this principle it is, that juries have, under the direction of the courts for more than twenty

quidated demand, previ

finding of a jury.

Skirving

V.

Stobo.

years past, refused to allow interest upon all open or book accounts, and this demand is on the same footing.

Rule for a new trial discharged.

Present, BURKE, GRIMKE and BAY.

N. B. The instalment act of 1788, allowed interest on all judgments which were not recoverable, otherwise than by five annual instalments. But rent was one of the exceptions out of this act, and could be recovered according to due course of law, without any impediment,

abolished in

districts:

AT the meeting of this court, a new era in the history of County courts the jurisprudence of this country commenced. At the last South Caro meeting of the legislature in the month of December, im- lina, and su.. preme courts mediately preceding this court, the county court system established in of judicature which had prevailed since the year 1785, in South Carolina, each county which were was abolished by an almost unanimous vote of both bran- erected into ches of the legislature; and all the counties in those parts of the state where county courts had prevailed, (for the lower part of the state never had them,) were by an act of the legislature, erected into districts, and supreme courts of judicature were established in each; and some new districts were created out of the lower divisions of the country, where the county courts had never been established; ma