HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0084 and id is 1 raw text is: JANUARY TERM, 1840. 141
rHe BANK OF ALEXANDRIA, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, vs. EDWARD AND
FRANCIS DYER, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR.
An action was instituted bv the Bank of Alexandria, in -the county of Alexandria, against
the defendants, residents in the county of Washington, in the same district, for money
loaned. The suit was brought in the county of Washington. The defendants pleaded
the statute of limitations of Maryland, which prevails in that part of the District of Co-
lumbia, and which limits such actions to three years, from the date of the contract. The'
plaintiff replied, that he was beyond seas ; claiming the benefit of the exception in the
statute in favour of persons beyond seas.
The words beyond seas, in the 3tatute of limitations of Mpryland, are manifestly bor-
rowed firom the English statute of limitations of James I., ch. 21 ; and it has always been
held, that they ought not to be interpreted according to their literal meaning; b t ought
to be construed as equivalent to the words, 1 without the jurisdiction of the state Ac-
cording to this interpretation, a person residing in another state of the Union as be-
yond seas, within the meaning of the act of Assembly; and therefore excepte' from its
operation, until he should come within the limits of Maryland. This statute i in force
in Washington county, in the District of Columbia, and this Court will give it the same
construction it has received in the Courts of Maryland.
The county of Alexandria, in the District of Columbia, cannot be regarded s standing
in the same relation to the county of Washington that the states of this Union stand in
relation to orie another.
The counties of Washington and Alexandria together constitute the territory o' Columbia,
and are united under one territorial government. They have been formed oy the acts
of Congress into one separate political community ; and the counties which constitute it
resemble different counties in the same state; and do not stand tbwards one another in
the relations of distinct and separate governments. Residents of the county of Alexan-
dria were not beyond seas in respect to the county of Washington.
IN error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the county
of Washington, in the District of Columbia.
On the 26th of October, 1835, the plaintiff in error instituted a
suit in the Circuit Court of the United States for the County of
Washington, in the District of Columbia, against the defendants, for
the sum of two thousand five hundred dollalrs, by them, the plain-
tiffs, before that time, in Alexandria, in the Di.,trict of Columbia,
lent and advanced to the defendants, at their special instance and
request.
The defendants pleaded 'the statute of limitations of the state of
Maryland, which limits actions of this nature to three years. To
this plea the plaintiff replied, that at the time of maling of the pro-
mi~e alleged against the defendants, they, the said pl'aintiffs, were in
the county of Alexandria, in the District of Columbia, beyond tho
seas: and so continued until the day of the impetration of the original
writ in this action.
The defendants demurred to this rep] cation, and the Circuit Court
gave judgment for the defendants. The plaintiffs prosecuted this
writ of error.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0084&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)