Harmon V. Sed per Curiam. It cannot be read for that pur Taft and Cogs- pose. Hesitante Hall. well. This decision has been since shaken. Vermont Stat. vol. 1. p. 169. In civil causes, where the de SAMUEL YOUNG, Appellant, JOSHUA SANDERS, Appellee. ACTION on promissory note, dated 17th February, 1791, for the sum of thirty dollars. Writ returnable to Chittenden County Court, September term, 1796. Plea to the jurisdiction. That a Justice of the Peace has exclusive jurisdiction of all civil causes to this amount. By the Court. The County Courts hold concurmand is above rent jurisdiction with the Justices of the Peace, of 7 dols, and un- all suits where the demand is above seven dollars, unliquidated, and 53 dols. in and where it does not exceed thirty-three dollars in mands, County unliquidated, and fifty-three dollars in liquidated de liquidated de Courts and Jus- mands. tices of the Peace have concurrent ju. risdiction. Plea to the jurisdiction overruled. On the 5th November, 1801, the General Assembly passed the following act: "An act in addition to an act entitled, An act constituting the Supreme Court of Judicature and County Courts, defining their powers, and regulating judicial proceedings. "Whereas it it is considered by some of the County Courts in this State, that they have concurrent jurisdiction with Justices of the Peace in civil actions, Therefore, it is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont, that the several County Courts shall not hear, determine, or adjudge on any action or suit which is originally made cognisable before a Justice of the Peace, unless such action or suit shall be entered in such Court by appeal; any law, usage, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding." Young V. Sanders. Vermont Stat. vol. 1. p. 101. County Courts' jurisdiction not concurrent with Justices of the Peace. 2 Dimond's V. Allen. In scire facias against administrator, to shew why exe cution should Executors of THOMAS S. DIMOND against IRA ALLEN, Administrator of REMEMBER BAKER. SCIRE FACIAS, to shew cause why execution should not issue de bonis propriis. Demurrer by defendant. Causes of demurrer : First. It is not alleged that said Ira was ever administrator on the intestate's estate. Secondly. That the plaintiff in his declaration hath nis propriis, it not alleged that there were assets in the hands of the not issue de bo is not necessa ry to allege expressly that defendant is ad ministrator, or that he has assets. supposed administrator. The counsel for the demurrant doubted whether in any case an action of this nature would lie: but more especially relied on the second exception; and cited Durnford & East, vol. 7. p. 27. Gill v. Scrivens. Lilly's Entries, vol. 2. p. 627. Counsel for the plaintiff. The law is so well established, that as to the action's being well founded, I shall be silent. In reply to the first exception in demurrer. It is sufficient to name plaintiff or defendant as administrator, without expressly alleging him to be such. Com. Dig. vol. 5. p. 586. To the second exception. It is established, that in every case the administrator is to be considered as having assets in his hands until shewn by him to the contrary in pleading. Com. Dig. vol. 5. p. 576. 576. In declaration against administrator, it is not necessary to allege assets in his hands. By the Court. A scire facias is a judicial writ, and the recital of the record on which it is founded is sufficient. If the defendant was not administrator, he should have shewn it in his defence in the original suit. If he has no assets, plene administravit will be good shewing in the present suit. Declaration sufficient. Daniel Chipman, for plaintiff. Dimond's Ex'ors V. Allen CASES DETERMINED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE OF THE STATE OF VERMONT. ADDISON COUNTY, JUNE ADJOURNED TERM, An officer is empowered to ELIAKIM CULVER against STEPHEN PEARL, PLAINTIFF complains, that by the considera set off one exe- tion of the County Court of Chittenden County, he cution against tween the same both in his same time. the another, be- recovered judgment against Abel Phelps for the sum parties, and of 61. 2s. lawful money, and prayed out his writ of execution in due form of law made returnable in sixty days from the date, and committed the same execution to the defendant, in his capacity of sheriff, to serve and return agreeably to law, but that said Pearl, contriving to injure, &c. neglected to return said execution, whereby, &c. ad damnum. Second count. Plaintiff declares on the same judgment and execution, aliter et idem, delivered |