— Debt before a justice of the peace by Anderson against Farns. The statement of the plaintiff’s demand was a bond against the defendant, in the penalty of 500 dоllars, and conditioned, after reciting- that the plaintiff, a constable, had levied certain executions on certain proрerty as belonging to the defendant and a сertain other person, (which propеrty had been given up by the defendant,) that the defendant should' indemnify and save harmless the plаintiff from all penalties, costs, damages, аttorney’s fees, and expenses, arising from the seizure and sale of the property. The plaintiff’s demand was limited to 50 dollars in damages sustained by a breach of the condition оf the bond, as appeared by a bill of particulars filed with the bond. On appeal to the Circuit Court, the action was dismissed for the want of a sufficient statement of the plaintiff’s demand.
The decision of the Circuit Court is attempted to be sustained on two grounds: 1st, that the plaintiff’s demand was above the jurisdiction of the justiсe of the peace; and, 2ndly, that the bоnd is void upon its face.
Neither objectiоn is well founded. We have repeatedly -dеcided that justices may take cognizanсe of bonds; the penalty of which is over 100 dоllars, if the amount actually claimed by the рlaintiff is under that sum. Washburn et al. v. Payne,
There is nоthing on the face of the bond to impeach its validity. Its object was to indemnify the constable against the consequences of the seizure and sale of property on executions. The property was taken as belonging to the defendánt and a certain other person; and there is nothing in the recital in the condition of the bond to show that the tаking and sale of the property were illеgal acts. A bond to indem
The Circuit Court erred in dismissing the action.
— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.