12 N.H. 328 | Superior Court of New Hampshire | 1841
The plaintiffs made a demand upon the defendants for a sum of money, their right to it depending, among other things, upon the alleged settlement of Joseph Hall, in Springfield. The defendants, by their agents, paid the money demanded ; and this payment had a tendency to show an admission that the settlement of Hall was in Springfield, as the plaintiffs alleged, so far, at least, as that case was concerned. Can this act of the agents be admitted as evidence tending to show such admission, in another case between the same parties, involving that question ?
A presumption of payment arises in relation to bonds, mortgages, judgments, &c., after a lapse of twenty years, if there is no evidence to repel it, and to show that the debt is still unsatisfied. 1 Phil. Ev. 160; 2 Cowen’s Phil., note 307, and auth. cited. Taxes cannot have any higher character, in this respect, than debts due by specialty, and of record. The assessment is in the nature of a judgment, and the warrant for the collection operates like an execution. There is no reason, that we discover, why the same principle should not be applied to them.
Judgment for the plaintiffs.