delivered the following opinion of the Court: —

Eakin sued Easly on an open account for the hire of a mare sixty-five days, at fifty cents per day; and on the trial he offered his book in evidence, connected with his own oath, to prove the account under the book *297 debt law, passed in 1756, ch. 4; Hay. Rev. 64. The Court permitted him to prove it in this way, to which permission Easly excepted, and brought the cause to this Court by way of appeal.

The act of Assembly upon which this question depends, is in the following words: “ In all actions of debt, or upon the case which hath been or shall be brought, where the plaintiff hath declared or shall declare upon an emisit, indebitatus assumpsit, quantum valebant, or quantum meruit, for goods, wares, and merchandise by him sold and delivered, or for work and labor done and performed, he shall upon the trial of the issue, or executing a writ of inquiry of damages, declare upon his corporal oath that the matter in dispute is a book account, and that he hath no means to prove it but by his own oath,” &c.

It is urged that accounts for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered, or for work and labor done, are those only which the creditor under the statute, can prove by his book and oath ; and that the account in question is neither the one nor the other; and that, therefore, such testimony ought not to have been received. '

It is true that in technical language as it is used in the English books, this account would perhaps fall more properly under the head of hiring than of work and labor. But the substance of the charge is for Eakin’s mare working sixty-five days in Easly’s wagon; and we are inclined to believe that the charge falls within the meaning of the statute. This is an old statute, and such items have for many years been proved under it.

The long practice under any statute ought to have great influence in affording a construction where the words are doubtful.

Let the judgment be affirmed.