...OF. (JVeu, promise.) When a case is to be taken out of the statute of limitations by a new promise to be raised by implication of law from the acknowledgment...to contain an unqualified and direct admission of a subsisting debt, which the party is liable and willing to pay. Iiiimtill v. Copp 5 NH 154. LOST DEED....

...delivered by justice Story. After reviewing all the principal cases, he lays down the following rule: — "If there be no express promise, but a promise is...of law from the acknowledgment of the party, such an acknowledgment ought to contain an unqualified and direct admission of a previous subsisting debt,...

...supreme court of the United States, lay down this principle as applicable to the statutes of limitations, "if there be no express promise, but a promise is to be raised by implication of law from the acknowledgement of the party, such acknowledgement ought to contain an unqualified and direct admission...

...Morrison, (1 Peters, 362) it is in/ substance holden, if there be no express promise to pay,i but the promise is to be raised by implication of law from the acknowledgment of the party, the acknowledgment ought to contain not only an unqualified and direct ad- rt, mission of a previous...

...Courts of Justice such support as would make it what it was intended to be— a Statute of repose. [2 ] If there be no express promise, but a promise is to...such acknowledgment ought to contain an unqualified admission of a present subsisting debt, which the party is liable to pay, and not merely that the debt...

...proved by parol evidence. But it is indispensable that there should be an express promise ; it may be raised by implication of law, from the acknowledgment of the party. To be valid, such acknowledgment must contain an unqualified and direct admission of a present subsisting...

...should be express ; it may be raised by implication of law, from the acknowledgment of the party.4 But such acknowledgment ought to contain an unqualified and direct admission of a present subsisting debt, which the 1 Bell v. Morrison, 1 Peters, SC Rep. 360, per Story, J. ; Mountstephen...

...Gardner v. Tudor, S Pick. 200, Bangs v. Hall, 2 Pick. 368; 2 GreenL Chambers v. Garland. Ev. § 440. Such acknowledgment ought to contain an unqualified and direct admission of a present subsisting debt, which the party is" liable and willing to pay. If there be accompanying circumstances,...

...any person representing him, it was not sufficient. If there be no express promise, but a promise is raised by implication of law ' from the acknowledgment...to contain an unqualified and direct admission of a present subsisting debt which the party is liable and willing to pay. If there be accompanying circumstances...

...11 Wheat. (TJ. S.), R- 309. 8 Bell v. Morrison, 1 Peters (US), R. 351. » be no express promise, and a promise is to be raised by implication of law, from the acknowledgment of the party, s\j$h an acknowledgment ought to contain an unqualified and direct admission of a previous, subsisting...