Cornish, J.

1. The appellant before me sued the defendants, eight in number, as members of a partnership upon a promissory note, which he alleged represented a partnership liability.

2. The first Court dismissed the suit upon the ground that defendants 1-5 were not shown to have been members of the partnership on the date of the note and, apparently, against defendants 6-8 on the ground that they having been adjudged insolvents the plaintiffs appropriate remedy against them was in the Insolvency Court. The plaintiff appealed. His appeal was dismissed upon the ground that by reason of the insolvency of defendants 6-8 a suit against them was barred by Section 28, Provincial Insolvency Act, and was likewise barred against the other defendants though they had not been adjudicated. The, lower appellate Court seems to have taken the view that though the suit might have been maintainable against defendants 1-5 alone, the plaintiff having joined the insolvent defendants as parties Section 28 stood in the way.

3. I do not propose to consider the reasoning of the lower appellate Court, because it seems to me that there is another and a more certain method of disposing of this appeal.

4.