Barden v. . Southerland

RodmaN, J. This case so closely resembles Bland v. ’ O'Hagan, 64 N. C. 471, in all material respects, that the *530 reasons given there reay be taken as for the reasons of our decision now. The bond is not the deed of the- defendant. It may be,, that when the Legislature made bonds negotiable, it would have been well if the Courts had interpreted the act, as putting them in all respects on the footing of promissory notes. They did not do so, but continued to regard them in all respects,, except so far-as they were directly affected by the act, as instruments under seal, requiring delivery to a certain obligee, &c. We dp not feel at liberty to reverse so long a series of decisions, because w.e could not do so without injury to those who have acted upon the presumption that they declared the law. If any change is desirable it must come from the Legislature. Pee Curíah.. Judgment below reversed,, and judgment for defendant.