directed the jury, that from the 10th of March, 1773, to june, 1784, was not to be regarded in the computation of tinae---and that payment might be presumed in 15 or 16 years, with small circumstances to aid it.
They found for the defendant; and the plaintiff’s counsel moved for a new trial; and after argument, and time taken to consider,
Hall said, it is proper that the time for raising a presumption of payment against a bond, should be fixed and understood in the same way by all the courts. Some other judges hare considered that 20 years was the time s here there is neither 20, or even 18 years; so that the presumption has not attached, if *242that opinion be correct. A.Iso, payment pleaded, means pay-rnent at the day ,- and if so, the evidence proved an admission of the debt long; since, and of course its existence since the time to which this plea refers. There must be a new trial.
Ilayvjcod endeavored to continue the other case for want of a materia', witness; but Hall said he would not receive any'affidavit but Cue plaintiff himself; and said to Haywood, “you know that it is a rule you yourself have urged.” I do not know whether he referred to T/heaton and Cross,- Wilmington,'May term, 1801.