Smedes v. Hooghtaling , 3 Cai. Cas. 48 ( 1805 )

Fer curiam, delivered by

Kent, C. J.

This case is submitted without argument. On a review of all the decisions on this sübject, the court think this rule ought to be adopted. That interest is recoverable beyond the penalty of a bond. But that the recovery depends on principles pf law, and is not an arbitrary, fid libitum discretion of a jury. In the present instance, we are of opinipn, that it is due, and therefore, the verdict to remain unaltered.