The Court did not decide whether the sum was to be considered as a penalty or as liquidated damages, but seemed to think that it was a penalty. They appeared to have some doubts with regard to their power, by the statute, 1785, c. 22, to assess damages in an
Vide Perkins vs. Lyman, vol. xi. p. 76.
[There can be no doubt the sum was in this case fixed as a penalty merely 3 ana was not intended to be considered as liquidated damages.—Asley vs. Weldon, 2 B. & P. 346.—Smith vs. Dickinson, 3 B. & P. 630.—Davis vs. Penton, 6 B. & C. 216; 9 D. & R. 369.—Charrington vs. Laing, 3 M. & P. 587; 6 Bingh. 242.—Kemble vs. Farren, 6 Bingh. 141 ; 3 M. & P. 245.—Homer vs. Graves, 5 M. & P. 768; 7 Bingh. 735.—Ed.]
