Professional Documents
Culture Documents
E. 3. MacBljall.
of
ICffi. iH.
1B34
The
tine
original of
tliis
bool<
is in
restrictions in
text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924084263791
PEINCIPLES
EQUITY DEAPTING;
APPENDIX OF FQRMS.
HUBERT
S,
B.A.,
LONDON
BUTTERWORTHS,
ILato ^uilisi)rt3 to
11)8
CO.,
7,
FLEET STREET,
ueen'8 most
raceltent iSIaicBtg
LONDON:
PRINTED BY
C.
BELI. YARD}
PREFACE.
The
design of this
Copious
Work
is
relating to the
and decisions
in
book of
Work
(with
reference in indi-
vidual cases.
The Author
trusted,
by
this
It
also
commonly
recurring in Practice.
circumstances
a2
PREFACE.
IV
discussion of so
much
and Jurisprudence as
demand a
separate Volume,
and Observations.
Meantime, however, what has been already done
will, it is
object
trusted,
viz., to
be
sufficient
to
effect the
main
in
also,
all
Pleadings
Courts
County
Treatise and
County Courts.
HUBERT LEWIS.
30,
Chanceet Lane,
July &th, 1865.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER
BILLS.
CHAPTER
I.
Law and
Pact
. .
. .
. .
. .
12
. .
CHAPTER n.
The Statements of Facts must not be yague (that is, ambiguous,
in the altematiTe, or inconsistent or argumentative), but
72
. .
CHAPTER m.
The ATerments
..
,.
CHAPTER
..
and within
,.
..
..
115
rV".
Facts must be stated with sufficient Particularity for Defendant's information, lest he be taken
CHAPTER
by Surprise
. .
Plaintiff
must indicate
CHAPTER
What
18
V.
and Relief on
which he relies, for the guidance of the Court, and lest
the Defendant be taken by Surprise . .
.
.
The
. .
167
. .
. .
186
VI.
CHAPTER VIL
Charges and Pretences
201
CONTENTS.
Vi
CHAPTER
ANSWERS AND PLEAS
vrn.
CHAPTER
AMENDED
PAGE
214
IX.
BILLS
233
CHAPTER
X.
DEMURRERS
247
APPENDIX OF FOEMS.
Original Bills
259328
Supplemental BUI
. .
. .
. .
Bill of Revivor
, .
. .
. ,
. .
. .
323
. .
, _
329
Interrqgatorieg
Demurrers
Pleas
Answers
Index to Tkbatise
Index to Pokms
. .
330
. .
332
332
532337
338340
340344
345349
35^
37^
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE
Allen V. Spring
Allsager v. Johnson
Armitage
o.
^^
V.
. .
Wadsworth
v.
Att.-Gen.
Corporation
Poole
Jackson
, .
.
of
39,
. .
v.
Mayor of Norwich
!>.
Whorwood
36
94
V.
.
Austin
v.
Moss
v.
Athill
V.
Bradley
V.
Harwood
Welton
V.
Bailey
Balls
Small
Chambers
V.
Bainhrigge
Baker
. .
..
Barton v. Blakemore
Barwell v. Brooks
Batchelor v. Middleton
Benfield v. Salomons
Bennett v. Neale
v.
Benson
v. Hadfield
Blacker v. Pepoe
Bleckley v. Eymer
Bowles
V. Orr
Bowser v. Maclean
Bowsher v. Watkins
Bothomley v. Squires
.
225
182
252, 253
..
92
59
253, 254
..
29
.. 197
.. 152
.. 192
..
37
..
Barrs v Fewkes
Bensley
45,78, 113
..
Barber v. Barber
Baring v. Nash
Barkworth v. Young
Barnes v. Taylor
Vade
Burdon
147
..218
Kenrick
Mnsgrave
V.
. .
v.
V.
132
46, 68, 199
..
34,35,41,46,
135, 149
.
197
171
.. 249
252, 253
.. 148
.. 225
.. 192
..
..
250
..
39
38, 74, 75, 80
..
Moyle..
..
Boyse v. Rossborough
Brangan v. Gorges . 26,
t).
Brice
254
254
Attwood
Boyd
V.
. .
PAGE
78
70
80, 111
Brownsword v. Edwards
Bruere v. Pemberton .
Buden ii. Dore
.
Bulch V. Tucker
Burrows v. Gore
Burton v. Blakemore
Burwell . Coates
Campbell
Carew
..
v.
Carleton
v.
Mackay
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
Johnstone
v. Leighton
224
250
260
163, 168
68
217
. .
36
46
32
. .
, .
. .
, .
. .
82, 123,
155
228
229
173
108
124
183
Christian v. Taylor
.
225
Clark V. Periam
68, 84, 124
>. Turston
..
., 217
Clarke v. Preeman
.
187
Clive V. Beaumont 19, 165, 167, 168
Cockrane v. Willis
. .
250, 251
Coleman v. Mellersh .
.
193
Connop V. Hayward .
. .
227
Cooke V. Lord Courtown
. .
89
V. Martyu
.
..15!)
Cawley v. Poole
.
Champneys v. Buchau
Chicot V. Lequesne
37, 120,
Cholmondeley v. Clinton 180,
. .
. .
. .
. .
Coope V. Carter
.
Cooper V. Earl of Powis
Copland v. Tomlinson
. .
Cox
. .
J.
Allingham
. .
. .
. .
191
253
149
226
Stephens
..
..125
Crayhome v. Taylor . .
32
Cresset v. Milton 89, 107, 109, 119
Croskey v. Bank of Wales . . 44
Crosseing v. Honor
.
83
J).
. .
. .
TABLE OF CASES.
Crowther v. Crowther..
Curson v. Belworthy
Cuthbert v. Creasy
.
.
PAOE
149
149
12
90,
..
..
Darthez v. Clemens
.
76, 130
Davies v. Otty
60
Dawson v. Yates
.
192, 197
Dell V. Hale
.
229, 254, 255
Delorme v. Hollingsworth
27, 29,
111
DeManneTilles.DeManneville 162
De Montmorency Vi Devereux 193
Flints. Field
Foley V. HiU .
Foot V. Besant
Ford V. Brj-aut
Dent . Wardel
Denys v. Locock
Digby V. Meech
Dobson V. Land
..
. .
..
..121
. .
Lyall
Donerail v. Donerail
V.
Donohoe v. Courahy
Dormer v. Fortescue
..238
141
27, 111
192
.
179
.
81
149
162, 168
225, 228
217, 229
..
..132
Duncalf
Dunn
Calcraft
V.
Durant
v.
Blake
Durant
Earl of Kinnoul
Earle . Pickin
Earp
V.
Lloyd
. .
. .
. .
Money
..
. .
. .
man
.
.
. .
182
115
76
69
254
Lake
179
. .
Bicknell
40, 42, 71
22
V. Corporation of Ayon
.
Evans
250
. .
. .
. .
. .
v.
..
. .
Gregory
v.
V.
Marshall
..
198
210
148
225
221
.
145
.
208
159, 161
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
182
Maltby
. . 42, 149, 197
Messenger
91, 115
Harding v. Pinkey
.
189
V.
. .
Hardman
v.
EUames
Harris v. Harris
Harrison v. Hogg
V.
1).
Waddy
60, 64
Borwell
. .
Hayden v. Bell
Hayward v. Purssey
. .
Heam
v.
Mill
. .
Heys
V.
V.
Hewitt
Astley
Hicks V Eaincock
Hill V. Binney .
V.
1).
Filkin
. .
. .
..
. .
197
I6I
214
152
252
. .
. .
. .
229
230
254
224
. .
lyy
. .
. .
. .
. .
way
V.
62
166, 167
. .
Heath v. Lewis
.
Hemphill . M'Kenna..
Henderson v. Cook
.
.
. .
..
Magnay,
Gregor v. Arundel
Hewitt
Eaulder v. Stuart 129, 217, 222, 229
Eerguson v. Patton .
242
Eerraby v. Hobson
164, 208, 212
..
Eield . Delaney
163,168
58
V. Hutchinson
Fitzgerald v. Flaherty
148
,
Fitzpatrick v. Power
.
234
Oliver
Hatton
187
172, 173
v.
11.
v.
t).
West
. ,
V.
Wright
Coope
V.
Graham
v.
. .
Espey
Evans
Lang
Hammond v.
v. Day and
. .
Glasscott
Hall
. .
Emperor of Austria
Kossuth
Ernest . Vivian
. .
Hagley
. .
Mitchell
127
. .
120,149
. .
. .
221, 224
. .
.
Emmett
..123
Grimes
..
159, 160
Hench-
v.
. .
91
190
28, 29, 180
. .
Molesworth
Grimes
. .
Edwards v. Edwards
Egremont v. Cowell
Ellis V. Colman
Emerson v. Harland
v.
217
161
..
Saiitos
Furrer
v.
Gossip
. .
Furrer
Dos
v.
Gordon
. .
Drew
Frietas
Drew
Vassall
. .
Foster
. .
Peering
V.
PAGE
115,212
139, 140, 207
..
Reardon
. .
. .
170
249
TABLE OF CASES.
Hills V.
Eowland
IX
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE
154
166
.. 244
126, 218
.. 218
.. 240
Cummins
O'Connell
v.
Ogilvie
V.
O'Hara
v.
Foljambe
Creagh
Oldman . Slater
Ormes v. Beadel
Ormond v. Ajiderson
..
PAGE
Rumbold
Palk V. Clinton
Palmer v. Mure
Parken v. Wliitby
Parker v. Banks
V. Ford
159, 160
..
40
221
..
54
.. 242
..
82
V. Morrell
V. Nickson
235, 239
. .
120
Partridge v. Thompson
. .
214
Patrick V. Blackwell
Pauneefort v. Earl of Lincoln
133
..
. .
v.
Beechy
229
32
Perry v.
122, 132, 133
Phelps V. Prothero
.
197
Philips V. Philips
. .
281
Phillips . Warde
120
.
Plate! V. Cradock
. .
198
.
Plumbe i). Plumbe
..70,127,212
Plummer r. May
.
70, 213
Ponsford v. Hankey
93, 127
Postgate V. Barnes
230, 252
Potter V. Potter
.
224
. .
Powell V. Trotter
.
192
. .
217
Powys V. Mansfield .
Prance v. Sympson
231
.
145
Price . Assheton
. .
V. Berrington
164, 179
Princess of Wales v. Earl of
18
Liverpool
. .
. .
Penny
v.
Hooper
Turpin
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
Rump
V.
v.
Sadler
v.
Lovatt
. .
. .
. .
..154
..229
..280
..189
..191
Dean
v.
Benson
King
Seymour
Sandon v. Hooper
Sanders
v.
V.
Sandford
v.
Saxton V. Davis
Scarborough v. Parker
Scarf V. Soulby
v.
v.
Arrowsmith
Sharp V. Ashton
Shepherd v. Morris
Sidney v. Sidney
Company
Eawlins
v.
..
Lambert
v.
Garcias
Ridgway v. Wharton
Eist . Hobson
Roberts
v.
Robinson
Routh
V.
Clayton
v.
..
..54
..
..221
. .
.
. .
Thompson
Peach
254
..
. .
96
123, 228
230
58
.
93
254
.
192
. .
. .
Kay
V.
V.
V.
Snead
Soden
v.
v.
Pincombe
Smith
Green
Soden
156
238
282
161
Spurrier v. Fitzgerald.
Stanley v. Eohinson .
Stansbury v. Arkwright
Stapletou V. Stapleton
Marsh
Gnppy
v.
Stevens v.
Stone V. Baker..
Strickland
Stroud
Stuart
V.
V.
Swabey
Sweet
Strickland
Ferguson
v.
V.
v.
Deacon
Burrows
V.
Sutton
Maugham
. .
. .
Steedman
Derbyshire Railway
..
159
211
125
69
152
. .
185, 198
.
81, 217
Sim V. Sim
193
113
Simpson v. Fogo
.
Skinner v. M'DongaU 186, 138, 142
.
Sleight V. Lawson
257
.
. .
Smith V. Clarke
217
V. Hurst
.
.
125
Shaftesbury
Eastrick
..
23,
Eyres
Eorteath
230, 251
. .
Greenhill
252, 253
Eyves
95, 103, 111, 131
Salmon
Pennington
v.
..
145
218
95, 109
162
23
162
63
249
68
248
149
225
180, 184
Telford
v.
Ruskin
..
Thomas
v.
Hobler
..
Thring
v.
Edgar
..
225
175
139
TABLE OF CASES.
XI
f AGS
Todd
Gee
Topham
..
Constantine
Townsend v. Westacott
Travers v. To-Hiishend
Turner
v.
Tumey v.
Williams
Baylej
Vernon
v.
Vernon
Vickers
v.
CoweU
v.
Walbum v.
Ingilby
..
..
..
..
..
. .
255
167
134
191
112
225
115
64,66
Watkyns v. Watkyns
Watson . Cleaver
Wattleworth
v.
V.
Bonham
Westhead
Keane
Boyer
Norton
v.
Weymouth
Whaley
v.
v.
68, 217
..
..121
Pitcher
Watts D.Hyde
Webb V. England
Weld
. .
.
.
.
. .
152
198
249
.
156
.
134
.
163
197, 217
. .
. .
,68
PRINCIPLES
OF
EQUITY DRAFTING.
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
JUDGMENT
of a Court of
Common Law
in favour
The
still
does
more defendants, some established remedy for some recognized form of injury,
and a judgment was merely sought whether, aye or
no, the plaintiff was entitled to such remedy. Hence
an action at law was not adapted to arrange finally
claim), against one or
was no complication
And
such judgment.
precision
And on
was possible
in legal pleadings.
pleadings at
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
2
Pleadings at
'-
Court of our lord the king be deficient in doing jusIn consequence of this enactment a new class of actions arose, called " actions on
tice to the suitors."
limited
at,
action con-
dered
suit continued
It is not to
by a judgment
all
had consecrated
Nor
is it
legal pleadings
spirit
(a)
of the
Common Law.
i.
213.
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
pleadings i
ff!^-
pealed to the conscience of the king by petition, representing tliat he had not, or could not receive, fair
treatment in the Courts of law; because they had
not power to award him rehef, or not that relief to
which he was
entitled,
show the
all,
or because
would
parties interested in
not dispose of
at
investigation as
the defendant
all
make such an
all
or because
and documents;
or,
finally,
because
when
all
the
it
liberal
The
grounds of relief
petition originally merely consisted of a plain
him
petition
came
be fixed in a very
at last to
Though
b2
usual,
it
artificial
was not
jnaent
"* '"^''
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
4
Ancient
pieaimg,.
But
it
was
ment of the material facts of the case, and some indication, by way of charge or allegation or of a special
prayer, of what relief and points the plaintiff intended
As a matter of common sense this was
to rely on.
proper in respect of the Court, to enable it to see what
the plaintiff was seeking, and what was material to
his objects, and to make a definite decision founded
on some distinct facts clearly put in issue and admitted or proved and it was just to the defendant,
that he might not be taken by surprise.
;
Now
it
is
equitable grounds of
relief, in
his statement
in established
Such statement,
too,
would
fre-
quently tend to raise somewhat indefinite and multiform issues, instead of clear, single and definite
issues; that
is,
occurred exactly as
INTEODUCTOHY CHAPTER.
however, the case might be stated with the same
positiveness, accuracy and completeness as at law.
But, when the plaintiff appealed to- those equitable
modes of
relief,
in-
but,
and completeness as
at law, because,
by
supposition,
sometimes
Now,
of
raise clear
in every case
relief.
The
it
a refuge
from the narrowness and powerlessness of the common law) led to great liberality as to the form and
manner of equity pleadings. " Pleadings in equity
are not considered with the same strictness as are
pleadings at
common
law.
came
(c).
And
to be ge-
will
be
sufficient,
if,
so far as
is
reasonable under
bill is in reality
a bill of discovery.
Ancient
Pleadings.
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
Modern
in
EqSfy.
and
The
bill
address,
part, allegation
ment
e.
g.,
the
plaintiffs, stating
as to defect of
process
said,
so that in
a thrice-told tale
of the
bill,
commencement and
bill shall
may
be, a narrative
which the
plaintiff rehes,
into paragraphs
where the
By
sect.
12,
the
plaintiff requires
bill.
From
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
matters before
the
statute, will
consequently
still
in Equity.
bills
rules of
The
may have
to be met by the peculiar circumstances of the defendant's case, and the indefinite
tiff's
case
Modern
Pleadings
apply.
own means of
must formerly have filed a cross bill,
so that by means of interrogatories addressed to the
plaintiff his case might be made out and completed
by the process of the Court. Thus then the same
rules as to manner and contents would, allowing for
the difference between a petition seeking relief and
discovery, and an answer showing why either or
both should not be given, apply to both bills and
answers, and they were accordingly so applied.
These rules, we have seen, will now still apply to
bills ; and, since the late act, they will apply still more
For sect. 14 enacts,
fully than before to answers.
that " the answer
may contain not only the
not fully set out his defence from his
information, he
Answer,
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
Modern
iasguitg.
but sect. 19
be at liberty to file
Our observations,
remarks on the manner and contents of equity pleadings will be principally addressed to the frame of
bills
of complaint.
Contents of a Bill.
it
appears
that
will
INTE0DUCT05Y CHAPTER.
we
it
be found,
will
where the
relief
it
all
in reference to
and complicated.
be observed, then, that the main object of
It is to
pleading
is
decree.
its
These materials
"secundum
allegata
proved.
et
probata" alone
(cf).
The
particular case
entitle
by the
verifying evidence.
plaintiff
plaintiff,
partly
him
to
which can be
and
identified,
a particular decree
if
will
admitted or
Eq. PI. 7
Norlmry
v.
b5
Gilb. For.
wod^
-EjkWj/.
oUjectof
^'
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
10
Modern
in Equity,
really inconvenienced in
of coursc
it is
in reference to the
Court and
its
and
decree,
that a
them.
fendant
may be
placed in a position to
know what
ou
accordingly as
it satisfies
the defendant.
Therefore,
may be most
And,
stated,
be
the
the
dehis
INTBODUCTORY CHAPTER.
1]
to the statement
by
We
heads
and
down under
the
following
law and
2.
fact.
that
is,
in the alternative,
is
proper.
Averments must be
positive
and
direct.
sufficient
par-
he be taken by
surprise.
The
What
8.
d.
Amended
6.
7.
bills.
10. Demurrers.
Mod(arn
Bquuy.
Divisions of
subject.
12
CHAPTER
I.
This
seem
from the
Tule follows
and may
no explanation or
we have before said)
late enactment,
to be so simple as to require
illustration.
But
it is
in fact (as
to the Court,
for its
law to the
down
facts.
common law
is,
must be
Cuthbert
v.
Cressy, 6
note.
The
objection
the defendant
is
is
13
.oromda
o.
'/
the Rule,
It is not,
which forbids
But
it
is
by
by
And
thus
it
appears that
if
upon which
facts
it
is
is
no
facts will
lie to
It is not,
distinction
fact,
41
et seq.,
47
et seq.
whatuacon""I'aw.
14
whatiaaconelusion of
i-im-
of facts, and
and sometimes by the decisions of the Courts declaratory of the law or equity under certain circumstances so that an inference, which at one time was
a mere question of fact, may become by subsequent
;
e. g.,
the question of
reasonable notice
to
and sometimes by
(j'),
ofLam!^'
Of iustances
statutes, we have one
facts.
of conclusions
will,
it
where the
in a particular way,
draw
made
particular
of law under
made
in that way,
it
Bankraptcy.
valid to
Grant of in-
heredita,
may be
776-7.
by
more
15
by deed ; and
where fraud or
instances /
o/zaw.
abandonment of a
praua, &c.
be proved, not by
contract, are to
^^i^JJ^""
*
Jj,/t
by
an inference from various facts based upon a rule of
law or equity upon the subject, or upon the ground
that it would be just or expedient to consider such
or of the formal acceptance or abandonment, but
law or
its
similar circumstances,
what
is
and upon
its
general view of
equitable.
Trust or
lation of trustee
trust.
whole circumstances.
To make
must
anticipate
it differs
we
The statement
fact will
it is
draw or
ticular facts
case
it
is
from that
pm-ticuiarity
i
16
'
is
(as
so remedied.
Mixed auestions of
Law
and Fact,
same
fact,
is
Thus the
" reasonable time" in certain
effect necessarily
question of what
follows.
we
are considering, at
common
law,
is
seen in a case
where a defendant justified in an action for false imprisonment, by stating that certain acts were done
" suspiciously" and " in a suspicious manner," whereupon the defendant had " reasonable and probable
cause to suspect," and did suspect, &c.
(i) Stark.
and the
We proceed to
give
some
can
it
(Z).
the action
is
file
bill
to be brought
Discovery
*^^' plaintiff
is entitled to
tring an ac-
won.
not
whom
stances as
taken to
-1
who
_^-
venturing to state
iiimtrauom
17
-^
may
Ev. 782.
Mayor
() Jones
of
V.
London
v.
Thatdiscovery
is
ma-
temitothe
action.
18
Illustrations
'
material
fendants
Lord Eldon
expression
'
said
may
afford,' points
me
have quoted ?
It
impossible.
affidavit stating
arises.-
stated,
it is
is
do not
require.
It
seems to
is
me
mode
circumstances"
The
(o).
of,
of a cross
is
ac-
ne-
^^
'^''^^^7
estaShthe
plaintiff's
"^
"'
(o) Princess of
Wales
Madd.
189.
Earl of Liverpool,
Swans. 126.
title,
to pro-
was partly an
it
illustrations
f!^-
so acted
and
to
have accepted a
title
all
ob-
to land,
was
Acceptance
Where
the
().
bill
seem on
it
would
be so disposed
V.
() Clive V. Beaumont, 1 De G.
Frankman, 2 De G. & Sm. 669.
(t) Post, Chap. IV.
&
Sm. 406
and see
also
Gaston
scindcontract,
20
Illustrations
The
the Court might at once dispose of the case.
party ought so to frame his case upon the record,
what the case is which
upon" {t). It is presumed these observations were only pointed at " the inconvenient
practice of putting in general charges, of which
to be rehed
neither
knows
some degree
(m),
plaintiff,
and most
Acqniescence.
seem
v.
(a:).
to be
in a fraudu-
In that case
for a long
time of the
I
/
file
the
Vraise inferences of
(<)
Hunter
fact.
Daniel, 4
Ha. 432.
() Id.
21
luustrauons
{^^-
it
some period
when he was unde-
ceived ;"
the plaintiff
knew
and
then to come to the conclusion of law that such conduct amounted to such acquiescence as would bar
his claim in equity.
meuts so vested
and are, subject
dividual
in the corporation
members of the
The
private
Trusts.
22
Illustrations
relief,
make up
tions,
considered by the
is
vsras
it is
averment of particular
facts if properly
made, with-
And by
made
the allusion
to the
that
this
is
is,
probably
'on the
to a
facts alleged,
it
according to the
The
of law.
money
in
trusts
{z)
Evan v. Corporation
Chap. IV.
6 Jur., N. S. 1261.
created
The
of law.
allegation
The
of trust
trusteeship is
is
how
is
23
was
the trust
merely a deduction
a conclusion of law
it a trust,
pleased to call
there
was an
although
it
equity.
My
bill,
opinion
is,
is
quite
the
bill,
bill
that Milligan
Upon
have
the
title
it
is
a trustee of
is
in
is justified
same ground
in that contention"
an answer
in
(to
(c).
bill to
Steedman
v.
Marsh, 2
Jur.,
N.
S. 391.
Co., 1 Hall
&
illustrations
"
24
lumtrauoni
It
was unnecessary
more
named the
to say
So
also
it is
An
Constructive
notice.
is
(e).
a mat-
the
bill
and an injunction
plaintiff's title
in
to stay proceedings
whom
under
of the plaintiff's
title,
for
charged in the
bill,
were delivered.
sition.
He
He
judges what
is
constructive notice
;
and
he had
does not impute direct
The bill
constructive notice.
notice to him."
seem
The
make
attempt to
belief,
plaintiff
will
deeds
title
it
out
by the
would
bill if
by evidence
the
as con-
Mayor
of Norwich, 2
Mont.
&
Ch. 466
713.
v.
Keen,
25
In a subsequent case
bill,
"
that
if
the
bill
distinctly,
and
been denied.
thority (A)
we
The
case
is,
sion of law
is
where a conclu-
it,
the
^
\
of the'conclusion of law.
But where
was charged
notice
in general terms,
The
bill
(i).
stated that
plaintiff's
be the
fact,
it
it
and that
"he
And
[the defendant]
(g) Pennington
(h) Post,
(i)
(ft)
L.
v.
Beechey, 2 Sim.
&
Stu. 282.
Chap. IV.
(1836) Hughes
v.
Garner, 2 Y.
&
C. 328.
1(1.332.
srot direct
notice.
26
niustratiom
of Rule.
^*'
Titi^
The
{m).
lie
case of
Walburn
v.
Ingilby
is
an au-
statement of
some
title
upon
must
this point
allege his
(o).
The
rule in this
the
is
same"
The defendant
of pleading at law.
apprised of
all
of descent"
{q).
Upon
entitled to
is
be
this
Baker
v.
Harwood,
7 Sim. 375
Houghton
v.
Reynolds, 2 Ha.
265.
Red. 37
Norbury
Meade, 3 Bligh,
(p)
(j)
Id. 295.
the plaintiff
wise
by
descent,
settlement or
27
other-
^'Jjf^^lj""'
neasonofthe
(r).
The reason of
.
rule as to
title, is
re-
titie.
Harwood,
Reynolds, where the
v.
title
And
not have
(t).
who was
nephew of the testator, and that F., one of the plaintiffs, was grandson and heir of Joanna, one of the
()
(*)
Delormeu. HoUingsworth,
(r)
Cox, 421
49,
*
c2
title.
28
''^Truu"'
TOaa
to
without issue
title
bill,
And
down
grandnephew B.
C, the plaintiff's
and co-parceners, who thereupon became the right heirs and issue in tail of S.
and it was considered a sufficient allegation of the
facts of the title, the V.-C. Kindersley saying,
" If the plaintiff had made a mere loose statement, as that A. left B. his heir, that would not
be reasonable certainty of allegation
or- if he had
said that A. left B. his cousin and heir, that, from
the generality of the word cousin, would not be a
sufficiently certain allegation.
But what he has done
is, to allege that A. left one his niece and the other
his grandnephew; and I think those terms desiglate wife, his co-heirs
{x).
as expressly
show the
and
Ford
()
Wright
V.
Peering,
.
Vernon,
by plea
side to raise
that
title is
defect.
its
late case(y),
Wood
reported), V.-C.
and
niustrations
In a
29
Honor deemed
the choice to
lie
only
v.
links to
'
'
i-
diverse interests of the plaintiff and defendant commenced. Thus, in a foreclosure suit, the mortgagee's
for
title must be traced back to the mortgage deed
the
earlier
acknowledged
deed
both parties to that
;
title
and are
in privity as to
V.
Fewkes, 12
W.
it,
S. 466.
Mortgagee's
30
iiiutimtiom is
gage
is
show how
And
Mortgagor's
his title
so, in
was
a redemp-
tion suit, the plaintiff need only trace his title to the
Between
And
title
to
redeem
iSsee.
lease,
the root of
is
Principal
and agent.
title
to
be stated
man employs an
.
agent
title,
Company and
(z).
it is
to state suflScient to
show a prima
it was alleged that the defendant took possession after A.'s death under some
pretended will of A. which never existed, it was held
any further title in defendthough as the heirship of plaintiff was not con-
ant,
(s)
(a)
Dan. Ch.
Walburn
Pr.
v.
by Headlam, 310.
Ingilby, 1
M.
&
K. 61
shown
properly, a demurrer
was
allbwed(6).
In
case the
plaintiff
alleged,
that
J.
be seised or other-
to
defeasibly entitled to an estate in fee simple in posin the messuages so devised as aforesaid :" that the defendant wrongfully took possession
session, &c.
had stated a
It
sufficient title
was
averred a better
title,
it
was
it
claimed.
made
An
mustratwns
"^faa-
another
tially
31
"
by being
better
whom
the plaintiff
is
abstract
pleading of the
title
of a party
is
not
made
niore
positive or certain
The question of
this sense, is
show a possible
(i)
is
title in
Baker
v.
32
niustrations
claims,
showing
without
nature
the
his
of
title" (c).
primd facie
oniyrequked.
In a
bill filed
by the
it
was
held that the plaintiff must state not only the lease,
but the
title
state in
whom
the fee
is
vested, yet
better
And where
title (e).
show a
a plaintiff claimed, as a
time
when both
possession of a
had been
was
in the
the
and
it
under
it
(though
all
{d)
(c)
Crayhorne
(c)
v.
Taylor, 1 E.
&
Y. 795.
v.
Coates,
Bunb. 129.
Having
spnng,
33
niustratwm
Manner, &c.
^'^'^^
acquired
it
Under
this
Rule
it is
(/) Norbury
v.
(g)
But see
(ft)
JerdeiD
v.
Bright, 2 J.
C5
& Hem.
330, 331.
fraud
or mis-
behaviour.
34
behaTiour'
and even
referred to
if there
be a general charge,
be
will
it
by the
particular
and
and cannot be proved otherwise
interpreted entirely
facts stated,
and
if
fail (i).
It
'
apply to fraud
may be
averred in
orcovinieing
matter of iTi-
covin
tention.
is
a matter of intention
(A).
fact
is
it
it
"^
The fraud
(Z),
is
is
there a
may be
a necessary
is
legally fraud),
admit to proof.
allegation
it
(i)
6 CI.
(/t)
Munday
&
8 Jur.
904
Attwood
o.
Small,
Q)
Fin. 394.
(m) Id.
s.
8;
Digests
niusirations
full
find
stated sometimes
the
/Ithat a general
inallegation of fraud requires
in
it
35
(o)
General
Charge Of
''^*.^j
no special matters would probably be required to be alleged even for the information of the defendants The doctrine, indeed, laid
down in Myddleton v. Lord Kenyon related to the
learnt
by a
stranger,
(n) See
(o)
</.
&
36
Illustrations
misled the
plaintiff,
of Rule.
General
charge of
fraud when
sufficient.
Collusion of
an execu1x>r
and debtor,
no answer"
(r).
creditor,
partner, &c.
making the
a similar
a general
bill
partner for
rule, the
personal representative
the only
is
on the
intention,
plaintiff to
which
it
was impossible
than by a
And
for the
distinct
as to the
account (as
we
Allsager
v.
from detailing
402
748, 749.
And
so where, in a
bill to set
award
was a general
aside an
...
37
nimtrations
of Rule.
Partiality ot
arbitrator.
support of
itj
declaration
by
is
is
is
a matter of
not to be charged.
cannot
now be
Court in
all
clearly
all sorts, it
cases (y)
wrongful intention,
sufficiently
it
would be very
which such
convenient to have some facts upon
*
.
is
great inconvenience
inferred
and
certainly
it
V.
() Benfield
v.
4144,
77, 78.
Facts from
which
it is
interred
better stated.
38
"^o/Ru'^
venient,
where the
plaintiff
state.
General
charge of
fi-aud
when
sufficient.
Munday
v.
Knight examined.
am
when
In a
late
case
(a) (1844.) 3
(c),
The Court
bill,
it" (6).
Ha. 497.
Bothomley
u.
and
I say, that
Squires, 1 Jur.,
N.
S. 694.
39
bill
mustrattons
if
the fraud
jjlaintiffs
decree.
is
it
not necessary to
as
sub-
if it is in
11^1
Fraud need
charged eo
nomine.
and that
by
such neglect they [the executors] countenanced and
stance alleged
by statmg
facts,
assisted
assets"
ful act
e.g.,
defendants
or
(rf),
(e).
cases in
decree.
Bowsher
Gedge v.
v.
Traill, 1
whenpaiticulars of mis-
behaviour
must he set
out.andwhen
40
Illustrations
of Rule.
may be made
Where
parculara of
aud need
be stated.
if
t-hem is required.
it
is
sufficient
taken on them
e.g.,
stated in an answer as a
plaintiff
"he
had taken several fees which were not due," " and
had concealed several instruments and writings beIn both cases such facts are
as
on account of the
because the
relief
but in the
is
required
and
wrong done by the fraud
should be traced out by the facts, and a remedy asked
plaintiff is entitled to {g),
accordingly.
"
bill to
for
It
misbehaviour, there
is
any ground
(i).
post, p. 47.
may
41
i~i
,.
'
'
full
explanation
if
he can.
may
in his
No such
answer give
notice is given,
42
explanation,
^"/Sf'" ^" "^*' S*^ ^'^ *^^ opportunity of
because the words imputed may not have been used
rule as to
at all, ot he might have satisfactorily explained them
in a way which would give them an innocent aspect.
The rules of pleading and proceedings in Courts of
Equity require such specification as shall enable a
party so charged to meet the charge by denial, or by
admission, or by explanation, or by confessing and
or
ther.'
And
bill
was the
upon which
defendant.'
From
it
(rn).
the
issues.
This
will
(0
further
6 Ves. 174.
43
^'^"^"J^"'"
bill,
that,
by the general
allegations of
The Lord
Chancellor (Cottenham) said, in reply to Lord Lyndhurst (o), the case as to the papers ought to have
Now
but, as will
in the rule,
by
it is
practice.
And we
therefore repeat,
and
\
\
&
down
new
practice as to
44
of
rule as to
fraud-
,.
which,
ticular allegations,"
still
holds good
(s).
And
in a
where the bill alleged that the defendant claimed to be entitled to certain property
under certain deeds mentioned,- " that these deeds
were a fraudulent contrivance on the part of the delate
case
{t),
parties interested
circumstances
constituting that
Fraud is a conclusion of
wholly immaterial and insufficient that
and
it is
any
did
not
On
(<)
Gilbert
the
demurrer, Croskey
v.
Lewis, 11
v.
it
W. R.
223.
of Wales, 9 Jur.,
N.
S. 596.
45
illustrations
The
if
it may be necessary to
....
1111
which it was held that a charge
of constructive fraud, which was imperfectly made in
the bill, was supplemented by the allegations of the
answer.
There, the defendant had threatened to
V.
(ar)
'
the con-
mention a case
"
in
Deficiency in
averment
of
facts not sup-
answer.
ooramei''"<=*-
proceed against his brother for the recovery of property on the ground that he was illegitimate, and
mate,
filed
bill to set
by
The
belief that
From
was such
there
the evidence
private
marriage.
it
was such marriage but that the pl aint iff had been
informed of it, and it was decided that though " the
pleadings on the part of the plaintiff seem not so
ample as they might have been with reference to so
singular a case, but it must be considered whether
(m)
Bainbrigge
()
Gordon
v.
'^*^(
46
Illustrations
of Rule.
Deficiency of
averment
of
facts not
supplied by
answer.
defendant,
by a
cross
an answer supplying
bill,
all
bill
it
to obtain
from the
plaintiff
knew
of the
and neglected
to reveal it.
And, from the above case of Attwood
V. Small, it seems probable such a decision would not
be given now. There the charge of suppression was
actually made though in somewhat general terms, and
the answer expressly opened up the inquiry under it,
and it was held that the particular suppression should
have been put in the bill (5), it should have been
need not be
stated
Qu.
(2)
(o) See
(6)
(c)
Jur. 1062.
11
bill.
And
indeed so
47
nimtratians
ctfRliU.
examined
(d),
seem reasonable to
common law now that, under the new practice as
evidence, the means of doing so are at hand, and
to
to
and not the minor items and particulars or the confessions, conversations and admissions proving the
This course would seem to be in
facts of fraud.
unison with the inclination of the Courts and the
demands of the
Another
statute
(e).
is
afforded
date of either of the wills, a commission of bankruptcy was duly issued against the plaintiff, under
which he was duly found and declared a bankrupt,
and
all
his estate
and
effects
Chap.
II.
Bankruptcy.
48
jumtrations self,
'
of Rule.
if issue
a bankrupt (that
is,
have occasion to
any question, and that jury may decide that the
party was not a bankrupt" {g).
Now this judgment is divisible into two portions
the first, which says that to establish a bankruptcy
facts to the jury the first time they
try
it is
law a
and the second, that the statement of such circumstances could not be evaded by the averment that
the finding was duly made, because it would not be
And
so far the
judgment
is
comprehensible; for bankruptcy or not was a conclusion of law to be drawn by the Court (A), and not
by the
on the
which must
on the pleadings. And
this is true, though Lord Eldon speaks as if a jury
would have had to determine the question of bankruptcy, which is not exactly the case, for the jury
parties,
{g) This
&
203.
(A) Stark. Ev. 771, n.
See
seq.,
This explanation
is
49
nimtrations
"tLJ^i"
necessary to show
first
sight to ignore
very likely a
difficulty in answering,
the uncertainty as to
to be supported
by
how the
by reason of
the facts.
The
plaintiff could
close-
Thus,
if
the
Exception to
iimted
at.
50
niuttrattom
^'
referred to,
we
certain cases
to such a
be admitted in
mode
it
burn
V.
of a
company
shares,
Ingilby
(i).
The
bill
plaintiff
had "purchased
at
which
have been
as
among
bill
was demurred
had not
plaintijQT
title.
stalment of
now
Now
shares.
that
by the
first in-
51.
is,
it is
alleged,
by
was approved
am
of opinion that
it
is
demurrer,
pleaded
and
it is
it is
true,
it
admits
all facts
shareholder
But
to
shareholding
make
the mere
Nor are
known in
law.
The shares may be anything, and may be quite
the mode of holding
different in different companies
them may be divers. The manner of transferring
them may be indefinitely varied, even where the
allegation
of
it
intelligible
without more.
interest is
well
known
exchange, which
is
d2
51
mustratums
52
"'ofRfh"'
by express enactment
or the case of an
g^xi^tionto
further In-
title
of the
and if there be
any conditions precedent, the performance of them
must be alleged."
Now here the question was, whether the plaintiff
had alleged sufl&cient circumstances to show that he
had an interest which would entitle him to sue.
Whether he had such interest, was a conclusion of
law dependent upon the fact of his compliance with
the terms of the company's deed of settlement.
And the judgment seems to lay down the general
rule and indicate some exceptions to it.
In the first
place, it decides that the performance of the conditions must in some way be alleged, so that the
conclusion of law may follow. Then it says, that
where a thing is not known to the law, but is entirely
plaintiff
must be
term, which
such performance, so as to make the use of it intelligible without more; thus the holding of " shares"
in such a company was not recognized at law, nor
had the term " shareholder" the meaning of a person
by the arrangement
on those who had conformed to the stipulations.
We infer that where the thing is known to the law
it may sometimes be expressed in the terms (if any)
known to the law without specially referring to the
possessing the rights conferred
conditions precedent.
But then the term known to
the law must be " intelligible without more,"
a posi-
tion illustrated
being a term
is
known
to the
Consequently
but
it
;"
it
is
and
its
therefore so
if
will not
be necessary to allege
may
specially,
it
sitions.
The
would apply
to a thing
certain
were
ways;
without more.
way and
term would be
not
intel-
mind.
53
iiiustratiom
''{_^-
54
Illustrations
of Rule.
Shares in
joint stock
company.
But the
holding, and
it
may
may
It
(I).
many
shares in
registration, or
in
Adverse pos-
(i) 8
(l)
&
profits
9 Vict.
c.
said
16.
Lindley on Partn.
I.
120124
sufficient;
Parker
v.
16 Sim. 176.
(n) Rastrick
(o) 1
ever
nephew."
and
plaintiff,
v.
M. & K.
Banks,
'
more a
still
extreme generality of
this plea is without any warfrom precedents or from the general rules
of pleading. The term adverse possession,' though
of a known signification, is not used in pleading, and
very rarely, I think only once or twice very recently,
rant, either
'
in the
phrase, and
sistent
it
It
but
it
is
as
may
a relative
is
incon-
consist in
may
and he
is left
to
mere
above
Here we must remark,
case of Carleton v. Leighton.
in the first place, that " the question whether the
facts of a particular case fall within the general terms
conjecture."
And
it
specified,
of a statute,
is (at least
them without
its
own
definition, according to
(*).
55
illustrations
"
56
Illustrations
of Rule.
meanins;
of law, for
of the statutes was a question
^
the proper raising of which there ought to have been,
,
^/
rule,
to
of the words.
And
fact, at
any
would
rate in a
plea.
It is
cision
supported.
clearly
(y) Shelf.
Stli
ed. 180.
v.
11
may
general rule
known
to the
law
II
Jiegviatiom
imposed by
tiie
,.
if it
be certain in
meaning and
its
what
stantial certainty
57
must be applied
statute.
\
!
to statements of
facts also.
we may
which
rule,
with
its
state
exception,
is
common
lato
of a thing
is
but where
from statute
and the statute
not derived
This
is
(r).
rule,
because
it is
is
to
is
rule,
an agreement (which.
aptly expressed
by the terms
which would apply to it as a conclusion of law) required by the Statute of Frauds to be put in writing
and signed by the party to be bound, may be introday of
by
duced thus " On or about the
an agreement between the [plaintiff] and [defendant],
:
it
'
d5
Saund. 276
a, n. (2).
or, if
Agreement.
58
Reguiaiiom
imposed by
stated to be iu writing:,
" without adding that
statute,
,"
and
it
will
be
was
it
-*
sufficient,
bill,
mode of
or in the
state-
agreement, that the agreement in which the defendant's name appeared was " in the handwriting of the
defendant," and that the agreement had been part per-
want of allegation of signature, held that the statements in the bill were not inconsistent with such signature, and on that ground, and because there were
other circumstances that might entitle the plaintiff
for
to
some
relief,
overruled
But
it{i).
all
that can be
gathered from that case seems to be, that if the statements had been inconsistent with the fact of signature,
Ves. 554
Stu. 643.
(0 Field
V.
Hutchinson,
Beav. 599.
Rist
v.
Hobson,
"
Sim.
&
69
Other grounds of
Regulations
ficient(M).
"SLe."
relief, the hill would have heen sufIn a late case, however, the V.^C. Wood
allowed a demurrer, on the ground (amongst others)
in writing, so as to
averred in the
bill
made without
consideration and
the Master of the Rolls disallowed a demurrer, and said, " It was clear that when the plain-
upon
trust,
the defendant's
'
name and he
Midgley, 2 Sm.
(y)
Barkworth
v.
& Hem.
Young, 4 Drew.
1.^
330, 331.
Wood
v.
60
Regulations
imposed by
Statule,
bill
to
what he
Indenture,
partes.
Further,
Conveyance,
it
is
if
it
of seisin either in
fee, tail,
or for
life, is
pleaded with-
Enrolment of
bargain and
saLe.
And
SO
sale
was inroUed
it is
by
statute,
because
it
was
Davies
Otty, 12
W. R.
to
682.
(4) Harrison v.
(c)
and
deed
is,
in
Regulations
it
is
statute.
must be
quently undesirable, as
to
we
stated,
necessary at
is
it
is fre-
But
lormality
which
it is
livery, or othei*
m the case
1
common law
(as
61
orant
oi in-
hereaita-
ments.
be by deed),
it
must be averred
{d),
has provided a technical term to express the substance of the transaction, as in the case of a feoffment
it
has
(e).
is relied
may be
on
ties,
and subjected
its effect
'
is
And now,
'
only
to formali-
9 Geo.
4, c.
14(/).
we
Exception.
Instances.
shall instance
some
upon the
was
in writing signed
by the
made"
though the
See post.
{/) 3 y. & Jer. 522 6 Bing. 26*.
(g) Hyde v. Edwards, 12 Beav. 160.
;
testator
is
and
sufficient
his wilK^r).
For
whole efficacy from the
(c)
it
'
that
does not, by
it
thereby limited in
promise to
'^^"'
62
McepHm.
Instances.
'
in
without more.
& 35 Hen.
VIII.
c. 5)
and
was
Then
manner
as
by law required
of real estate"
And
{h).
it
in such
was
also necessary to
Or it might be
made and published his last
state
(A)
V.
The word
(i)
Waddy, Hay.
&
J. 601.
personalty, and the words " last will in writing" to a devise of realty
though
sorts
it is
made
(.*:}
before 1838,
it is
when speaking
not necessary.
n. (2).
and
therefore,
of a will of both
See Co.
Lit.
Ilia.
(t),
and
is
now no
c.
Exception.
26,
63
13),
it
Probate, ao.
allowed to be
suflBcient,
because
issue
"
now
and
necessarily im-
it
certainly
would
must
And now we
was
will,
it
(n).
^1
only be
so
far as
the
Court
is
it
it
can
will be sufficient,
The
without more."
Walbum
v.
the instances
we have
In
many
(0
Wms.
v.
Leighton, and
Ex.,
Ingleton, 1 P.
id. (D.)
&
we have made on
of its applications
(m) Humphreys
(n) 20
observations
21 Vict.
c.
77.
W. 752
and Stone
v.
Baker,
tm
Exception
defined.
64
deflmd.
Theexoep-
way
equity re-
substance in
law, be Stated
on the prto-
if
the material
But
times auowed
in Courts of law.
in
somc of
applications
its
Thus,
it is
v.
Ingilby) which
known to the law and can be supported by evidence in only one way, the exception seems to be
are
embodied
Instances at
law.
in
equity
(o),
the
rule
that
its
r),ot
he expressed, as in the
(q).
So, where
say
it
pleaded that
it is
it is
not necessary to
for
is
it
shall
be
by metes and
303
b.
354
Harrison
i>.
Hogg, 2 Ves.
jun. 328
Cooper,
65
Conditions
-^^
(<).
This
case
last
is
indeed a clear
y
of.
it is
neces-
precedent,
stipulations of a contract,
it
will
be observed, that
formance specifically
shall
e.g.,
tions.
Whilst
it
power of
cordingly at
common
averment of performance
(O
so.
Ac-N
i-
'
66
and
cmmtioM
Precedent,
re
j
mm is etiected.
.
The
new
trial.]
is
followed,
we have
seen,
stantially
in equity ()
And
(x).
is
Walburn
Id.
Ingilby, 1
M. & K. 61
ante, p. 50.
67
come under
to
f
\
the evidence to
damnified
indeed,
But
it
if
opponent, he
is
it is
this rule, it
may
so firmly based
to think that
does so even
it
if it
when
(y) Pennington
now
it is
t>.
But, on referring
made
first
Coke's Reports
of fraud
we
it will,
The
by him
be a charge of
Beechey, 2 Sim.
&
Stu. 282
ante, p. 25.
Authorities to
the contrary
examined.
68
Averment of
elusion of
Law requires
no Answer.
and which
is
cases of
V.
iii
c
both charges or im-
I'l
Penam (c), which
were
-r*-
Clark
(a).
and
'
made by way
The next
{d).
v.
Trotter
in
(e),
facts
of not accounting
an oflB.ce and of
which were not due nor mentioned
were mentioned in general terms (/).
The next
case
is
Attwood
(^), in
v.
which,
real facts
were
suflSciently
answer.
The
allegation in
Buden
v.
(/) Ante,
(g)
(fe)
II.
Russ. 353.
(i)
(ft)
T 1
was held
*
.
plaintiff's title,
to require an answer,
was
which
.,
Shaftesbury
v.
Arrowsmith
(Z) is
So
an authority that an
be heir in
tail) is
entitled as heir in
is
tail,
shown
would
In Emerson
v.
Now
the question of a
modus
is
a question of fact,
(0 4 Ves. 66.
And see Wig.
(m)
(n) 3 Sim.
490
S.
C,
8 Bligh, 62.
69
Averment o/
a mere Concimionat
no Answer.
70
But though
Averment of
a mere Conelusion at
Law requires
no Answer,
it
the defendant
mav be
.77
is entitled
any
to
'
mere
make
interest, it is a
sufficient to
is
would be one of a
some answer. Thus
been
to avoid a demurrer
though, as the
under
bill
it
and
contained
showing that
it
it
was
claimed by
show he was a proper party to a suit for foreSo the statement that the defendant claimed
to be heir-at-law, and had brought an action at law
in that character and succeeded, was a ground for
the suit for estabUshing a will by a devisee against
him though it seems that, unless it had been stated
that he had so acted so as to vex the plaintiflp, the
to
closure.
allegation
demurrer
(r).
(j)
Plumbe
(r)
Boyse
H.
of
li.
Ca.
II.
Plumbe, 4 Y.
&
sufficient to
avoid a
however, of a mere
allegation,
Rossborough,
v.
The
C. 350.
Kay, 71
v.
De
May,
G.,
M.
Ves. 426.
&
G. 817; 6
plea and
answer in support, merely denying the claim or pretence, would be sufficient defence to a discovery founded on the claim, &c.
no charge at
is
issue so that
it
may
it
all
71
be for the defendant to charge his interest proand state the facts, making out his case with
will
perly,
Indeed,
certainty.
and so
we
when
far as it is material to
show what
title
and
in-
manner of
and
interest
need in no
considering
we
are
(s).
lative to charges of
As
if).
consider
how
we
shall hereafter
Mr. Wigram
is,
in
Post,
Chap. IV.
See Gilbert
Railway, 1 Hall
{t)
Evans
v.
v.
&
W.
Lewis, 11
Twells, 80
Averment of
R. 223
Munday
cited.
72
CHAPTER
II.
Again, a statement
Sufficient
may be
show
this.
Facts not
because
stated.
it
no way connects him with the plainand of course in such case there is
tiff's grievance
no claim made out. It is scarcely correct, however,
It is clear and
to term such statement "vague."
/ definite enough in its meaning, but its failing is that
it in no way states in general or particular terms,
directly or inferentially, some fact material to the
stance, if
it
in
plaintiff's case,
)
states
such a case,
as, if
bill
be demurrable
(a).
Kemp
73
herision
situation,"
knew
party to
it,
to answer a fraud,
in the
bill,
that he
it
when
a party
ought
to
may know
it
is
brought here
be distinctly alleged
exactly what fraud he
had
any control over the
And
H.
Kelly
t).
Rogers,
1 Jur.,
N.
S.
defendant
L.
may answer
and
ante, pp. 41
v.
Kay, 7
is,
so that
77, 78.
sufficient
*"<'2-
74
Sufficient
Fa^ts not
stated.
collusion
then
''
secreted,"
to the plain-
income of the property had been fraudulently appropriated by the defendants, the V.-C. Kindersley,
in allowing a
said, that it
whom
it
"must not be
fraud
will as children of
were
all
Bottomley
v.
Squires, 1 Jur.,
2 J.
N.
& Hem.
S. 694.
75
in fact to
make
certain
and
upon the facts stated it appeared that the payments
might possibly be proper, it was insufficient to charge
the defendants with a breach of trust
city fund,
sufficient
^"tllT
jj^eaX^f
*""'
because it did
not necessarily follow from the facts that the payment was improper, and the other view of the case
;
As another
bill
who
this, that if
I am
I must,
support the
do
to
to
lay
the present
;
be
so entitle him.
down
it
bill,
bill
and vague
to support
that a balance
due
is
particular charges
to either
were struck
party
out,
;
it
and if these
would not
v.
v.
Mayor
of Norwich, 2
2 Jur., N. S. 153.
M. &
C. 406.
Accounts.
76
Sufficient
Facts not
stated.
to interfere,
it
Law"(/^).
rrictas
!).
Dos
Santos examined.
General
charge not
limited by
particular
charges.
This case
often quoted to
is
show
that a general
inclination of the
to the contrary,
down by
it is,
facts material
(i)
And
accordingly in a later
Frietas
v.
(i)
Darthez
v.
Dos
The Master of
sisted on.
there be a
items,
bill for
and the
upon those
77
if
sufficient
particular items,
and the
bill
stated.
demand
happens to
it
bill,
it
him a
sufl&cient statement to
show
In a late case
law.
(A),
however, the
bill
alleged
and contained a
plaintiffs
to
believe,
v.
Dos
it is
is
strong to
by a
And
limited
it
(/)
left
See Smith
v.
Kay, 7 H. of L.
Ca.,
lei 766,
'
here^"
seem
relied on,
&c.,
post, p. 82.
78
Facts not
ttated.
But
allegations altogether.
not give
bill
full particulars,
were considered
(m) Bainbrigge
()
Boyd
V.
sufficiently pointed to
v.
show a
79
incomuteney.
two incon-
be always
fatal to the
for
bill,
(o),
re-
even, perhaps,
would
is
if
there
is
is
an ambiguity as to whether
meant,
if
allegations, or
is
pleader,
and the
bill
will
well-known
Rawlings
v.
Lambert,
Johns.
& Hem.
462
post,
Chap. V.
(p) Ibid.
(})
But see
post,
Chap. V.
378; Vernon
v.
Vernon, 2 M.
&
Cr. 171.
Amuguous
statements.
80
AfM^mut
St atement s,
iDBtancea.
Thus, in a
bill to
stated facts
in-
or otherwise duly
came
to
was
It
held, that
no
title
was
particularly
made by
leased, but
it
inference
it,
is
is
entitled to
;
yet he
is
bill ir).
ever
(r)
(s)
().
8]
''
Ambiguous
orAUernative
st atemen ts.
bill
but
such time an
interest, it
was held
sufl&cient
by " reaBut
{t).
then the agreement recited the existence of such interest and was founded upon it, and the assignment
So
title
too,' a
as matter of inducement,
and
bill (m).
111
To use
a wife had " misbehaved herself" (v) or that she did not " behave
with that duty and affection as became a virtuous
charge upon which the party rests his case.
such expressions as
woman much
this
that
would
be too vague
And so a statement
necessarily charged.
that a person " was of a weak and feeble understanding, approaching almost to idiocy" was not a
was not
(<)
Hunter
98, as to
()
See post,
(k) Sidney
(a;)
v.
words "shortly
v.
Donerail
after."
p. 92.
E 5
Walton, 9 Jur.
charges
asainst charaoter or
conduct.
82
was allowed
insane
rraua.
-yjy-g
was of
filed (?/).
jj^^^e
would
sentation"
" unfair
charge that
obtained;" because
sense, that
is,
it
it
might be unfair
in a legal
is,
therefore, too
'
tive to
something else:
the
Carew
v.
Johnston, 2 Sch.
&
Lef. 280.
(o) Parker
<b) 7
H.
v.
Company v. Drew,
83
manner before mentioned," and the bill sought to set ^'f !"'!
^""^'"^"
it was held not to be demurrable,
because the allegation, though loose, was perfectly
distinct (c).
It did, in fact, show what the misrepreaside the securities,
So a
t^-
who made
it.
heir
and
it
exceptions
we have
no
it
but in no other
(c)
Smith
oif
plaintiff,
was an understanding
way
to that
(d) Crosseing
creditors
and
such pretence was
other
84
And
if
give no equity
to.
(e).
suffer
by
is
ticulars (/).
Argumenta-
It
tiveness.
is
that
them
On
observed, that
Difference
between an
implied state
ment
of fact
in-
and an
ference of
fact.
it is
be collected by
which it must be
positions of fact which are alluded
to
to,
{d) Morris
(e)
Williams
&
Ph. 91.
85
tively alleged.
How far they ought in any case to
be independently stated, is a question of particularity,
and will be subsequently considered. But the infer-
Argumenta-
facts are
point,
general,
tend to
will
simplify the issues, and to give clearness and precision to the pleadings.
TT
1
Company
^
Henchman
w.
which such argumentative pleading was held vexatious and absurd, and fatal to the bill.
And in
another case (i) it was said, " But there are many
instances in which it is not sufficient to state merely
the evidence of that which is intended to be proved
But it would seem
or established by the evidence."
probable, that the rule would not be so rigidly enforced in equity as at law.
If there
is
a substantial
e. g.,
where
acceptance of a contract,
it
would not be
The case
Gaston
Vi
post, pp.
99101.
Frankum, 2 De G.
&
Sm. 561.
just put,
it
would
suieasto
argumentativenessnot
so Ti^A as at
i-
86
Argutneniativeness,
be equitable
to hold the defendant as having accepted
^
i
this rule
to point
decree.
uscful
left
J
to
that
But
inference.
./
.
observe,
to
even
it
mam
In
many
fact
is
are stated.
may be
the
if
cases, therefore,
it,
if
they
where the
in-
the rule
is
is
close
This distinction
is
by amendment,
defendant
may
often be supplied
by directing further
Particulars.
In order to
make
Chap. IV.
Thus,
*"t3, we
t* v^
in
many
'
Court
87
will often
be
is
show the
title
to sue,'
yagueness
arising fi'mn
insufficient
Particulars^
satisfied.
relief.
description,
when
Place, however, as a
considered, and
if
be in England. However,
a thing as land,
it
need not be
it is
if
(I)
Mytton
V.
"
88
^"?"f
arisiTig from
^wSS
made
it
might be taken, against the pleader, to be subsequent to the indemnity, and so, on demurrer, the
bill failed (m).
Indefinite-
ness in case
for
Relief,
made.
be vague when, though
A bill
said to
some equity
it
is
viz.,
sometimes
conclusively
show
do not
define with sufficient precision what the equity and
relief are.
This may arise from want of particularity,
or vagueness, in the allegations, or in the whole case,
that there
in the
is
same way
the equity.
depositors in a savings
trustees
and
in
Leigh
1).
(m) Vernon
9 Jur. 98.
(in
re-
Vernon, 2 M.
&
Cr. 145
ii.
Welton,
89
home
charge
to
to
Would
decree?"
pay,
when
or
all
indefiMfe-
/<" i^euef.
to
time, &c.,
common
had from
Some
(5'),
will help to
We
may
require, in
Cooke
effect
Lord Courtown, 6
V.
of a deed, &c.
(/))
Mayor
of
London
v.
Ir.
p. 107.
But
Technical
90
^reJ^"'
But
degree of vagueness.
there
is
may be some
here a difference
which
cfAdmissil>ns
TagumeM.
^
^^
may
relief,
conveniently be adopted.
may sometimes
plaintiff
attempt to
make up
for
rights,
by
fendant
alleging admissions
less the
it is
whatever be the right of the defendant, she has waived it in favour of the infant,
an admission
that,
without stating
how
or
by what means
[that
is,
the
(s).
(r)
Crowther
(<)
But see
v.
post,
Chap. IV,
allega-
91
mi
n
Ihus, an allegation " that the defendants have had
./
Aiiegatmis
tocwetke
Vagueness.
strong
if it
it
was
said,
bill
have been
went on to
some of them
insufficient,
as true,"
because
it
One exception
did not
proper reading to be
Thus where,
in a bill
would render
the
bill
altogether
erroneous "
(m).
Hammond
(b)
Foot
v.
Besant, 3 Y.
& C,
Ex. 320.
Court will
look to the
whole Bill.
92
seem
Court will
look to the
w hole Bi ll,
easily
reconcilable with the other cases as to
^
,
But
yagueness.
if
we remember
that a demise of
there
is sufficient
certainty,
v.
same con-
clusion.
Facts within]
*'^/A^^
^^-^
case.
otherwise
And
redemption
suit,
so where, in a
() Ante, p. 61.
(y) 4
() Baring
v.
Nash,
p. 81.
V.
&
B. 551.
93
uncertainty as to leave
estate
ject to reduction
transferee in the
wholly
unknown
claims to be and
and he
alleges that
to this suit," a
generality
only.
The
some measure
Though, as
it is
(6) Ponsford
v.
Anst
716.
Hankey, 9 W. R. 510.
piaintifl's
94
F(KU
within
state his
own
knowledge
of the
Defendant.
in
-n^j
^.^
almost
knowledge, and, to
trial
of the plea
all
(c)
whilst,
discovery,
sarily
(c)
230, n. g.
(rf)
Wadsworth,
95
ground
fail
entirely to
make
&C-'' Facts
out any
upon
wuhm
^J'
Defendant,
it,
plaintiff in
him
in a
to
is
bill will
be held demurrable.
in
ment of
facts necessary to
may be some
make out
is.
Thus, in cases of
may have in
plaiiitm
with precision
trusts,
com-
takers,
first
trustent;
latter,
and
it
when asking
facts sufficient to
(e)
Wig. 132
Stansbury
v.
post, p. 98 et seq.
Jones
v.
someinae-
often seen.
is
96
Facts withm
knowledge
0/'^
and an acbill
that
A. had
where
stated
a
(_g),
remitted certain sums to Ireland " for the benefit of
the families or descendants of J. and B., and that
such remittances were divided amongst such families
to giving a discovery of those particulars
count.
Thus
large
for
in this
stirpes,
kingdom of the
said J.
and B. equally
&r\A
per
for
trust
tion aforesaid a
sum
bill
sought to recover a part of these trust funds on behalf of one of the children, and prayed an accoimt
it was held, that the trust sufficiently appeared, notwithstanding the inconsistencies in the allegations
{g)
Reed
v.
97
and the want of certainty and precision in the statement of the trusts, and a demurrer on this account
was not allowed, but, on account of the apparently
were
stated, the
And where
on
this point.
was
in
that she
was about
be as stated.
to bring
All that
is
required in
bills
of discovery
show
withdraw the case from the Courts of law by preThey will not
it and refusing discovery.
judging
(A)
L.
Wright
V.
rmts wuMn
o/the
98
(i).
'teowSf ^llow a plea in such a case raising the point of law
"^^^ above case of Wright v. Plumptre may show,
stfe^t
/ however,
bill.
is
for the
vague-
still
be required ;
it is
otherwise where
cumstances of fraud or other misconduct of the defendant preventing the plaintiff from gaining accurate
knowledge.
must not'
is,
as
we have
just seen,
dwibt whe-
more
lie
(^
by
virtue of
bill
was
speci-
it
lease" or
loans" to
was alleged
assignment
686.
Eq. Jur.
s.
1493, a
Rumbold
v. Forteatli,
2 Jur., N. S.
99
facts wmin,
of the
rents
that the
and the
for rent
prayed a
discovery, and that the rights of the plaintiffs might he
ascertained and declared ; for an account of the deal;
bill
(A)
went out
Wormald
v.
De
to India as a writer in
Lisle, 3
p2
Beav.
18.
100
Must appear
plaintiff
has
some and
wliat sort of
equity.
if
profits,
and that
in
all
he would
let
consequence he bought
him to enter
them have certain
it
to the
company
silk at
at a large
to
keep
in
that
it is
is
is
hill in
And
so where the
(Z).
was
and heir of the body of his father and
heir at law and customary heir of his mother; and
that, at the time of the marriage of his father and
mother, his mother was seised and possessed of or
entitled to divers estates " as one of the coheiresses
bill stated,
heir at law
some manner
all
bill]
life
" became
or in
tail in
fee or abso-
possession, or
some other manner," and stated that the defendhad taken possession of all the estates comprised
ants
in the settlements or
and
which belonged
to the mother,
Barnardiston, or
and contained a
(I
v.
Henchman,
Defendant,
102
Facts within
knowledge
of the
Must appear
plaintifl
has
some and
what sort
of
prevailed
equity.
everything,
Applicable to
nothing.
The
it
applies in certain to
which it
exchange it appears the plaintiff could do so. There
must be what Lord Hardwicke called convenient cer-
is
to
tainty.
relief
The
plaintiff is clearly
he prays
and
in that case a
demurrer
lies to
bill.
... It
103
very
important to a defendant,f ^Mts mtun
./I
is
knowledge
whether the
bill is
plaintiiF is
entitled
fendant's right to
not,
in
know what he is
"f*^
D^endant.
of the de-
respect
or
which the
in
not to answer.
is
q.
whether
where the
the
uncertainty as to the
And
if,
therefore,
it
is
prays
relief also
plaintifF
and
may show
knowledge
them
it
ap-
v.
as to
184 (m).
s.
is
312.
At any
relief.
Red.
104
Facts witun
knowledge
relief
o/e
bills" jordis-
covery only.
bill
reason
by adding
which there
is
no jurisdiction to
entertain, because
it
he was in a
position to obtain it at law, without any assistance
other than discovery from equity.
But this supposed rule, that greater precision is
appears that, at any rate as to part of
it,
covery
is
be
laid
down
relief, he will be
than where he makes
out a claim to some legal relief, whether or not he
actually prays any relief at all.
It
may
not at
strictness should
first
why
greater
other,
(o)
(n).
105
-f"" ?'"
knowledge
may have
r./'i" ,
Defendant.
for
and
amount, and to obtain the means of establishing and
enforcing them, whether they be legal or equitable
and it would, consequently, seem that he ought in
fairness to receive the same measui'e from a Court of
equity.
Otherwise, it would depend upon the accident of his claims being legal or equitable, whether
he obtain redress or not. And as to the defendant;
he can demur or plead to the case equally, whether
it be legal or equitable, and so avoid the discovery if
he has any defence to offer in that way(p); and it
would appear equally necessary that the case should
be stated with such certainty as to enable him to
avail himself of such defence and avoid the exposure of his deeds, title, &c., whatever the case be.
It must be observed, that the above case, when'
strictly read, only seems to lay it down that an equitable case need not be stated with the same definiteness as a legal case for which discovery is sought.
\
may
f5
more discovery
\
,'
necessary
to try
the truth of the defence (q)
j
j
is
right, state
it
and
which such
seldom admit of technical preCertainly we have seen that the rule cannot
cision.
apply to ambiguity and uncertainty as to the existence of a claim, even where that claim is equitable
for we have had many instances in which equity will
not tolerate such faults, though the case be one enbill requires,
will
and
it lie
within the
know-
is
in truth
it
(s).
Let us, thereexamine some of the cases relating to both
kinds of
to the
where
suits, to see
rule.
And
first,
(?)
Wig.
43.
(r)
(s)
Whitw. 377.
Wig. 132.
107
those rights
Ihus,
o/me
sought.
is
a bill to perpetuate the testimony of witnesses to a right of way, the Lord Keeper said, " If
you have not laid the way in you bill exactly per et
trans, as you ought to do in a declaration at law, I
demurrer for uncertainty"
Where
the
bill to
{t).
nesses as to a right of
....
time, &c.
common
is
suppose,
cellor said,
is
by the words
what
is
intended to be proved.
or otherwise,' do you
'
mean
that
But
you
Special pleading
are at liberty to prove any right ?
depends upon the good sense of the thing, and so
does pleading here; and though pleadings in this
to
If
you want
given right
I
it is
to perpetuate testimony as to
capable of description.
is
At
any
present
to prevent
the demurrer"
From
(m).
this
V.
Hayward,
(a) Cresset
v.
P<Kts withm
knowledge
Vern. 312.
is
all
108
Facts within
knowledge
of the
that
IS
another case
Strictaesa In
bills lor diS'
covery only.
Cases examiuecl.
iii/^jAJ*m
*'
may
ancillary relief
(a:),
sums payable
in
him
to
by the defendants
as rector
in
said
houses, the
because
it
particulars,
custom, that
its
made
fendant could be
show
so as to
his liability.
fact,
This case
a conclusion of law.
may
explain the
is
well
known
and although
in this
the
same general
principle
mere
technicality,
justice."
veniences
And
it
is
and
disadvantage
would be put.
The argument of counsel
()
Champneys
v.
to
in
v.
allowed in
109
Mayor
of
York
v.
Pilkington, do not
seem
well founded.
it
{z), in
Where
common
of fishery."
up of outstanding
terms stated that defendant " threatened to set up
some outstanding satisfied terms of years or other
a
bill
right in
it
it
was
was any such term or estate, nor set forth what sort
of a term or estate it was, so as to show that the
plaintiff had a right to recover notwithstanding it:
as the plaintiff by his own showing, if the legal fee
ought not to recover in ejectment, if the defendant claimed a legal estate in a term under some
will,
one
in possession (a).
In a subsequent case
plaintiff's cousin, died
intestate
and without
issue,
that
C,
had entered
into
() 1 Ves.jun. 450.
(a) Stansbury
(i)
Baker
v.
v.
Facts witiun
^IftiJ'
'
110
Facts withm
knowledge
qfthe
D^endavt.
Strictness in
biiLs for dis-
covery only.
Cases ex-
amined.
./
C, and
against
This was
particulars.
sufficient,
devise,
fair trial
But the
cient.
Court
allegation of title
" In pleading a
is
to
defendant
is
title
entitled to
be apprised of
all
the links
sought, the
in respect of
both the
claim to
Rumbold
v.
Forteath, 2 Jur.,
N.
S. 686, as to allega-
it
does in
all
,
And
other suits.
.
.11
*-"
m aid
so,
Ill
on exa-
of actions at
law,
sought,
is
required as to the
it
would
strictness
In-
And upon
is
sought.
drawn
(6)
in the
Wright
*.
above case of
Ry ves
Ryves, between
v.
Mayor
of
London
v.
Levi,
Norbury . Meade,
3 Bligh, 223, 228, 229 Brangan v. Gorges, 7 Ir. Eq. Rep. 296j
Red. 37; Digby j). Meech, Bunb. 195; Delorme v. Hollingsworth,
8 Ves. 398
Hougliton
v.
Cox, 421.
Facta wumn
knowledge
of '*
Defendant.
112
W?ien Yague-^
Tiess only
fatal in Paril
j
bill
asking
practice.
Finally,
it is
it
for, if
the case
is
not stated
so vaguely as to prevent the defendant from underentirely, but only from being prepared
meaning of the terms used, the pleading
will be taken against the pleader in its more limited
sense, and the plaintiff will only be entitled to relief
to that extent.
Thus^ where the bill claimed tithe of
agistment of "barren and unprofitable cattle," and defendant concluded it did not refer to sheep, and
made no defence to it so far, the Court refused an
standing
it
on
Demurrer.
It
strictness
may be
it
as to cattle (c).
how
the plaintiff's
case
intended to be made
is
out (d).
Inferences of
Fact cannot
be
drawn
against
Pleader.
mean
stated,
is
and
may draw
insist
upon
Turner
(d)
Smith
Rumbold
v.
113
inferential facts.
The defendant
demurrer.
have anything inferred from such averments beyond the actual statements which they conentitled to
tain
....
he
is
before
we
If a fact be
matter of
-a.
and a
wills,
bill
was
filed
by
"knew
fact
it
from the
"Whether
plaintiff,
man
is
or
But an
man knows
allegation that a
having been
all
one which a
man
It
another to be sane,
is
really unable to
would be impossible
is
not sane,
answer"
to take issue
is
(g).
upon the
But
Simpson
v.
Togo,
Johns.
& Hem.
18
(/) Bainbrigge
(g)
Smith
V.
v.
Moss, 3 Jur., N.
S. 58.
scientific
J^-
114
Opinion.
know the
it
115
CHAPTER
III.
Thus
it is
fact; to
say
these words
and the
ment
Nor would such stateeven where the fact was one peculiarly
suffice
by the charge
may
be made by
way
(_/).
But a
of counter charge,
averment of the
(a)
(d)
be charged
{g).
Red. 41.
facts intended to
v.
Staveland,
Ves. 56.
v.
Messenger,
9 Sim. 335.
(e)
Vickers
v.
v.
Lee,
16
allegation of
ETC.
support a
bill
against a demurrer
insufficient averments,
any
assert
fact;
it
None
(i).
of these
be perceived,
will
do
might
really
plaintiff
If,
it
there-
might
that,
on the
wasted ;
to
plaintiff's part,
for if the
which the
must
And
information, &c.
all
bill
as to his belief,
the
averments, and
plaintiff's
But
rule (J).
it
must be under-
And
White
(0 HiUs
V.
0.
Rowland, 4 De G., M.
&
G. 430, 435
964.
(J) Red. 298, 309.
(4)
Lord Uxbridge
v.
Staveland,
Ves. 56.
22 L.
J.,
Ch.
ETC.
there
a further reason
is
why
the
bill
should be posi-
tive,
now]
is
Ante, p. 29 et
93
post, 127.
117
118
CHAPTER
IV.
^^ have
been considering
how
a pleading must be
may be
parties
We
and they
must be alleged with such certainty that, when the
defendant joins issue upon the allegations, those
exact facts, and none others, must come into controversy and be made out or not by the evidence.
Though, then, the Court in many of the above cases
referred to the manner in which the statements would
present themselves to the defendant ; it really was as
a means to the end of procuring such distinct issues,
that they required statements of material facts, which
the
may, however, be
terial to
distinctly averred so as to
fact
be ma-
may
take
on
it
or avoid
it,
it
is
119
'
seasons and
Import of the
^'''^-
quality
What
in
any case
to determine.
The
be a
will
particular statement,
is
suflBciently
a question for
rule
is,
minute and
common
sense
is,
fully
may
suffice.
" Pleadings
~ must not be unnecessarily prolix.
It de- undertheoid
Practice.
modem
is
little
verbiage.
And
is
again,
But see
(c) Cresset
120
Reasons and
Import of the
""'
side; and,
must
all, if
under which,
when
if
the case
came
trnderthe
NewPrac!
New
Practice as to evidence,
justice
it
seems
by
and the
Court
will
in such case even extend the time for closing the evi-
C^').
also interrogate
v.
177
318
480
et seq.,
reporter.
(/) Partridge
v.
Thompson, 17
Jur., L. J. 1110.
N.
S.
533
S.
C, on app. 832
and
121
n
if
and answer
and,
(A),
he should find
bill neasomand
Import of the
necessary,
it
be
by
doing
why
it
was
plaintiff to
so.
Accord-
was assigned
less
necessary
in
now
do more than
cient clearness
relief is
And
alleged
is
to be established" (A).
& 16 Vict.
c.
86),
was expressly
pleadings,
to
be
confined and
require
be,
to
to
stated
the
only, and to
material
facts
of
case
the
devoted to
particularity,
Hope
v.
Threlfall, 1
Sm.
&
16 Vict.
c.
in
accordance
86, s. 19.
L.
76fi.
^"'^^
22
what has thus by the new practice as to evinow rendered practicable, and what by
the principles of pleading is proper where practicable.
" Certainly the old practice was to charge the defendant with having books or papers in his possession
or power before you could interrogate him as to that
fact
but when the legislature has said, you must state
the facts upon which you rely, and you are at liberty
neanmimid with
fiMfe-
dence been
to
file
by the
it is
made
necessary
gatory, because
it
is
The
is
The
in support of them.
The
object
of
the legislature is
in
{I).
mind when
iiiuatraHom.
Court
is
said,
Perry
(m) See
(n)
v.
'
it
adverse possession'
Mansell
Hardman
v.
Ellames, 2
M.
8;
K. 739.
v.
Feeney, 9
as
is
W. R. 532.
but
it
may
123
consist lumtnuiont.
It gives no information
no notice of the defence he is
to meet, and against which he is to prepare himself;
may
for
it
consist
bill
or answer,
more
particularity,
commenced
in
Jamaica
in
giv^en,"
Red. 295.
(p) Carew
(q) Foster
(r)
(r).
&
Lef. 280.
v.
Johnston, 2 Sch.
v.
Ricardo
v.
Garcias, 12 CI.
g2
&
Fin. 368.
124
inuitratio nt.
The above
may be
case of
Hardman
v.
Ellames, however,
in relation to particularity.
Again, in a
there
was a
bill to set
geileral
aside an
award
for partiality,
facts or cir-
The
stated.
facts
but
And Lord
according to a preconceived opinion.
Hardwicke said, " If a bill is to set aside an award,
bond, or deed for fraud, imposition, partiality or un-
due
charged.
when
is
is
not to be
the
cause
turns on
it,
issue
is
insane
man
is
ad-
Chicot
() 2
V.
Atk. 337.
to.
125
"under
this
and
if
the general
is
of the
bill to state
it is
made
it is
to be
it is
not
by way of
particularity,
though
it
may
be ad-
Statute of Frauds.
But,
if
Cox
v.
Stephens, 33 L.
(y)
Smith
V.
Macn.
J.,
&
W.
Ch. 62; 11
5 Ha. 281
Smith
G. 364.
v.
R. 929.
Hurst, 10 Ha. 30
illustrations.
126
Illustrations,
is)
by
it
an opportunity of con-
{z).
by next of kin
to the
it
for his
own
benefit as executor,
in
by which
his claim
gation
is
by the
effect
was made
No
"
is
alle-
entitled
he
is
he should take
for his
own
benefit,
was
In stating a deed or a
fact,
we have
be stated with
it
it
to
within
The
rules as to particularity
Oldman
v. Slater,
3 Sim. 84.
or fact.
law
is
all
that
common
necessary at
is
127
niusirauom.
(c).
The
on which the
plaintiff's title is
title is
grounded, unless
title
of both to some
of the
how
duty to show
plaintiff's
it is
neces-
common
it is
no part
In the
J
1
i
i
excepted
case, however, a mere general statement
i.
is
party; and
manner
is
a suffi-
it is
in
If he has
he must plead or disclaim, but cannot
no
interest
demur
But
{d).
defendant,
it
or arrangement
(if
In
had
Loker
v.
Roile (/ ), the
bill
in
anyway
o.
If the title is
offer to disclaim
hearing, even
if
523.
(/) 3 Ves.
7.
he disclaim by answer
Furrer
v.
up
to the
Furrer; 30 Beav.
Facts within
knowledge
defendant.
of
128
Illustratio ns,
by
Facts Trithin
lands
defendL?"
bill
upon
this equitable
mode
when a
of
plaintiff relies
would simply
relief, it
though
this
be
so,
But
he needed no discovery.
made by
company
or the direc-
be
ulti-
by which,
if
produced,
its
in
(A)
ante, pp.
9298.
insufficient to
129
years,
And upon
this
that no consideration
paper copyright,
an answer as
any,
all
that
is
for
a sale of a news-
depends upon
was
was paid
payment, if
" It
is,
in the bill as to
titles
six
whether there
this
is
such a charge
as en-
where, &c.
all
it
make
upon
was paid
questions
all
out whether
it
it
that
....
The
known
to
will permit
when
exhibited
in a bill
many
of the parts of
work had been copied from the plainThe Vice-Chancellor said that, " it has
the defendant's
work.
always been considered
tiff's
work
v.
g5
130
which they
The
rely
case,
for
known
to defendant
Law
that a Court of
show
them.
So, also, the cases of Williams
v.
Earl of Jersey
charge of the
defendant
as evidence in
support
thereof (p).
But
it
Sweet
(i) 6
u.
Maugham,
Beav. 164
11 Sim. 51.
ante, p. 76.
De
G.,
M. & G.
597.
even though
a satisfactory reason
covery
is
given for
it,
and a
dis-
the defect
may be
The
may be
131
cases
fatal
{q).
we have
given
may
furnish
some notion
It will
is
allowed
there
must be some
against
pleading,
limit.
However,
if
the rules
amination really to be allegations of legal conclusions; and the pleading becomes, in such cases,
necessarily particular, if the facts on which such conclusions are based, are set out.
is
is
to
to
the interrogatories-
allegations are so
wide
that,
If,
therefore, these
practically,
no
limit
Beav. 18
(r)
See post,
p. 132, as to the
intemgatopartieu-
132
ri^eTguidl'io
''Z^u^
^ould be placed to the interrogatories, but the plaintifF could ask almost any questions for the purpose
of making out or finding a case for himself; the
bill will be two vague,
it will be what is called
a "fishing bill."
The Court will not allow its
machinery, designed to afford more complete justice
than can be found, in particular cases, elsewhere, to
It will not,
be used as an engine of oppression.
to
The
Wigram on Discovery ()
" Dis-
thus laid
down
covery
is
in
interrogatory charges^
whennecessary.
any
fictitious
Att.-Gen.
()
is entitled
bill {t).
unnecessary in a
it is
way
charge, by
bill
133
of foreclosure to
1,
interrogatory charges.
them
will appear,
them
But,
{x).
it
may
particularity of statement.
are
means of
case,
filling
a succession of
title
and
Thus, where a
documents.
wills, it
plaintiff
was
claimed through
trace his
sufficient to
tents (z).
And
Hudson
V.
Feeney, 9
(a)
Marsh
(x) Id.
W. R.
(y)
W. R.
;
v.
Keith, 9
Perry
S.
v.
W.
Marsh
v.
R. 115.
Mansell
532.
Keith, 9
() Pauncefort
878; Mansell
683.
v.
W.
R. 115.
v.
Feeney, 9
i^ certum
est.
134
^inT^
And where
a conveyance as
fraudulent, stated that the grantor had become insolvent, and that " his debts in his schedule appeared
to be 8,184Z., of which 5,600/. were due at the time
of the conveyance ;" and the plaintiff craved leave to
refer to such schedule, and stated that he " intended
the
bill,
to set aside
it was
was a
himself, this
debts
sufficient allegation
positively there
(rf).
plaintiff
open an account,
bill to
it
possession, of
specific
Kay
(6)
Westhead
(c)
Ante,
(rf)
Townsend
v.
to
Marshall, 1
v.
offered, in
be shown before
M. &
Keane,
Cr. 373.
Beav. 287.
p. 130.
v.
it
will
135
which requires
Enidemx.
r
J the how to be
tacts must be stated, it may be useful to point out, stated.
that the plaintiff may, if he pleases, be more particular, and may in fact state to some extent the evidence upon which he relies to support the material
facts of his case, so long as he does not lay himself
open to the charge of undue prolixity in details.
But there is sometimes an inconvenience in setting
out the details of the case; for the evidence must
support the allegations of facts distinctly put upon
record, and the plaintiff might be bound to prove
his main facts exactly in the way stated in his bill,
and in no other way (/). Such details may, however, sometimes obtain a more favourable hearing
for his suit by at once showing to the Court, upon
the face of the pleadings, how well founded and clear
is his case.
Indeed, it was said by Lord Cottenham {g), that although " provided there be sufiicient
(e)
very
much
is
it
obviously
ness
may
he sees
is
called
upon
to say
no possible means
post, p. 142.
136
Evidence.
of contradicting him."
ever, to
facts
" Ab Evidence."
it
(i)
plaintiff alleges," or
said agreement
" the
cer-
and
his case
for
bill (fe)
want of proof
whilst the de-
{I)
can ascertain by means of the interrogatories, founded on the special allegations, exactly
and the
plaintiff
new
case.
(i)
See post.
(ft)
Skinner
Madd.
(I)
v.
M'Dougall, 2
De
G.
& Sm.
265
Bird
v.
Bletchley,
17, note.
et seq.
and
post, p. 139,
137
It is always, however, a matter of discretion whether the details of the case should be revealed or not.
If the plaintiff has a crafty defendant to deal with, it
may
possible,
what evidence he can obtain by wringing the conscience of the defendant) to state nothing by way of
detail except what the defendant must know can be
If such course be pursued, it may
sometimes happen, that statements may be made in
the answer which the defendant would not have
made if he had known the means the plaintiff had
surely proved.
fendant's
may
surprise, or
way
to such de-
damage
on
all
his statements.
But
case,
to set
it
if
by throwing
discredit
And
its
being in
What we
is,
we
think,
Bmdence.
-j^riien
stated.
to be
138
"Aivt-
may
dence."
planation.
authorities (m),
agents,
if
whereas,
if
be proved, and
must of
itself
be
sufficient to
con-
stitute
Effect on
it
is
must
fail.
As
to
answer.
the
first
which these
first
part of
On
authority.
was quoted,
is
inconsistent with
v.
v.
Bletchley
any interpretation
that
of the statute
answer, only
may be
when
effectively insisted
on by the
bill,
&
Bletchley, 6
(n) 2
Da
Madd.
G.
&
17, n.
S. 265.
than
if
he stated
quoting Brice
v.
or stated
it,
it
139
which
as the agreement
is
"Asmi-
a reasonable rule.
We may
that
when
facts are
But
(o).
others,
King, 6 Madd. 61
(o) Sanders v.
274
Pennington
Beechy, 2 Sim.
Thring
v.
;
Edgar, 2 Sim.
see cases in
&
St.
Hardman
M. & K. 743745.
Hardman v. Ellames, 2 M. & K. 742, 743 5 Sim. 642 Wig.
Disc. 142 et seq. Foley v. Hill, 3 M. & Cr! 475
2 H. of L. Ca. 28
Hunt V. Penrice, 17 Beav. 525 Young o. White, Id. 535 post,
V.
Ellames, 2
(p)
Chap. VII,
Effect on
'"'*
140
AtEvi-
bill
dence.
unless
conclusions,
Effect on plea.
filed
(').
when
the
bill justified
been
case of Foley
a rejoinder.
Now
such replication
is
not permitted;
bill,
or in an
amended
bill,
and require
to
pear,
it.
it
was
Hardman
v. Ellames, where
had documents in
But
inconsistent
evidence,''
and an
But
to hoth charges.
in
bill
it
has
which
it
whether
n.
Jerrard
v.
Sanders, 2
141
answering them
"AsSvt-
in claiming
validity,
its
But
it.
it
is
it
may
perhaps be considered in a
it is
liberal rules as to
case of the
e.
g.
by way
Sometimes a
the fact of an
it
is
the everyday
or independently alleged
plaintiff,
than of that
fact,
the particulars
may
Denys
v.
Locock, 3
() Ante, p. 139.
dence conflnesto
particiilara
similar
re- whenevi^
M. &
Cr. 238.
*''''^''-
142
"^^i"
"when evidenoeconflnedto
particulars
stated.
'
Skinner
M'Dougall.
v.
bill
letters,
bill)
make
dependent on the
as part of the
In the
foi-mer.
letters
dence only.
decisions
is
that
left in
which no
in
doubt by these
and formal
distinct
is
be taken.
pendently established.
There the
bill
may be
inde-
charged that
You.
&
Jer.
574
so,
had
it
143
11
contained proper
vague.
there
is
According
allegation
to
such particular.
words
all,
or to deprive the
We
"asevu
dence."
submit
144
" As Evidence."
is
to consider
any portion of
evi-
dence conlined to
particulars
condemn
it
stated.
The
stated.
plaintiff's proofs
to'the evidence
we venture
is it
without
v.
Dos
we
submit,
ticular allegations.
rule
(jr).
own hand
the agreement),
and
agreement without
77.
the
writing,
which was
only
matter
145
of
form(y).
And, again, where the bill first stated that the delet and the plaintiff to take certain
premises, and afterwards stated acts of part performance, and a paper writing as a written agreement,
the plaintiff was allowed to prove a parol agreement
fendant agreed to
to
And
prove the
lien (5).
And
may be
may be
substantially proved.]
and of conclusions
(y) Spurrier
v.
(z) Gregory
v.
(a) Price
(6)
L.
facts
V.
Assheton, 1 Y.
Malcolm
v.
Scott, 3
&
C. 82, 441.
"AsEvi'-
146
"As Evi-
dence,"
matter, yet the latter stand on quite a different foot"Wlien evidence confined to
particulare
stated.
by statement of
ments,
it
conclusion of law.
Matter 0/
Inducement,
One
tration;
It
IS,
illus-
mends
stated
itself to reason.
by way of
general terms
Confessions
and
Admissions,
(c).
PI. 11.
147
Chambers (ti)
"Now the
bill charges, that the defendant had admitted that he
had purchased for his cheut, Mr. Austin, but it does
not charge that he had said so to a witness of the
name of Sinclair. If the bill had charged that he
had said so to a Mr. Sinclair, the defendant would
have had an opportunity of cross-examining Mr.
in the case of Austin w.
cor^essions
AdmSnom.
he often said
so,
The
rule,
strictly
extend to
&
(c).
h2
Now
had
these
wntten
con-
148
And
it is
above remarks
The
diflferent rules as to
defendant will
But the
effect,
or to meet
them {g).
elusions of law
was more
strict
p. 135.
(^)
Graham
(ft)
35-1.
o.
Blacker
v.
Pepo'e,
Moll.
149
(_;),
or that plaintiff
(i),
or of a trust
(ft),
(l).
above rea-
V.
Tomlinson, 7
Small, 6 CI.
&
Fin. 489
(j) Garrett v.
(i) Donohoe v. Conrahy, 1 J.
it
&
L. 698.
maybe
doubtful
and the
would
(0 Copland
(/)
it
Thus, in cases
be a declaration of
if in writing,
Sometimes the
fact.
of the' trust under the Statute of Frauds, from which the Court would
facts
c. g.
Margareson
v.
Saxton,
Y.
&
v.
Fickin,
C. Exc. 528
Rus.
Stuart
&
v.
M. 547;
Ferguson,
M'Mahon
v.
Admissions,
&c. under
NewPractice.
150
Faetttcte
stated /atrly.
all
seeks relief
is
the material
which he
relies,
law upon
the pleader
Finally,
must bear
in
mind, that
must be
set out
even with
is
title
words, when
or documents
them
fairly,
(n).
or of
In
it.
(m) Ante, p. 120122 and see Story, Eq. PI. 265, and note in
which this subject is discussed, and from which it appears that in
the American Courts it has been ruled that, since their new rules as
to evidence, admissions need not be expressly put in issue by the
;
pleadings.
(n) Mont. Eq. PI. 11.
the requisite
-^
151
particularity of statement
will
the plaintiff
it
With regard
open
it
must do so
fairly (o).
It
operation as far as
is
will
will
prove their
not be misled by
be not complied
to a hearing the
In ordinary cases,
with,
if this
plaintiff's case,
it
and
But
an ex parte motion
(o)
is
made,
Mont Eq.
Pacts
tou
stated fairly.
prevent a defendant
to
it is
where
especially necessary
Plead. II.
particularity.
152
Pacts
tou
statea /airly,
that the rule should be observed ' otherwise, the injunction so obtained will be dissolved with costs,
whatever the merits really may be in favour of the
:
plaintiff,
full effect to
the matter
suppressed {p) ; though, on a clear and positive aflBdavit of ignorance of such matters, an amendment
be allowed.
In th case of Barwell v. Brooks (q), it was said,
on a motion to dissolve an ex parte injunction, "None
will
That was
the
in
bill,
granted.
bill.
indefeasible, for
By
this suppression
and that
bill
requires
it
much more
to
be stated in the
And
is prayed even
and not ex parte, it cannot be obtained
if there has been any such suppression (r)
and no
amendment will be allowed except on such affidavit
as above mentioned.
But although the statement of a deed or other
document be not fairly made, yet, if the bill refers to
the deed, when the cause comes before the Court, at
at the hearing
When
stated.
deeds
(p)
worth
Hemphill
I).
v.
M'Kenna, 3 Dr.
&
War. 183
wrong date.
Sharp
v.
Ashton, 3 Ves.
&
B. 141.
153
may
m^aof
usual R^er-
mcetoseeda,
by
full
oppor-
reference to
This
may appear
deed, thus
Mistakes
plaintiff.
has been
it
made not
or false colour as
when
it
it
as
mistake
however, that
It appears,
and
(s).
if
deed unfavourably to himself or omits portions supporting his case, he will not be allowed, by virtue of
the reference, to read the deed on argument of a
bill
stated a
mortgage
in terms
such
own
certainty; he
()
h5
154
Efftaof
enceioseedt,
bill
ings thereto.
But
it
the
bill
and referred
and found
make a
O'Connell
(k) Sadler
v.
v.
Cummins, 2
Ir.
Eq. R. 251.
by
tents,
Upon
may
it
bill (w).
contents are not in issue, and so, even with such reference, the instrument cannot be read either against
or in support of a demurrer
him
to
some
relief,
and so
And
By an indenture dated,
and indeed the "usual reference" is seldom
employed by many practitioners in equity, though in
Sec.;"
the form of a
bill
the
The
statute,
(ij)
is
indeed used.
(w) Campbell
v.
Mackay,
M. &
C. 603, 613.
165
^^'l /
Mistake
injurious to
defendant.
156
Efffiof
enceto^oeeds,
reference,
terms or
eflFect,
imperative
not, either in
is
(a:).
effect, as
its
purport and.
yet, if there is
bill,
no repre-
is
referred to
we have
done)
(y),
may be
the deed
them
seen
some
for in-
may be
read on argument of a
demurrer.
made between
may
though successful
in the form.
(y) Ante, p. 133.
(a)
Weld
V.
(a)
Baker
v.
M. & G.
Bonham,
2 Sim.
Bradley, 7
653, 663.
De
&
G.,
Stu. 91.
M. & G. 616
Smith
v.
Pincombe,
157
CHAPTER
THE
PtJlINTIFF
POINTS
We
V.
it
is
RELIES.
bill to
it is
upon the
law
and proved.
facts stated
also, it is
In pleadings at
clusions.
But a bill in equity does not merely claim a judgment that the plaintiff do recover for some formulated
cause of action as does an action at law, but seeks
some peculiar relief more suitable to the case and
the adjustment of
subject-matter.
theory,
it
all
the rights of
This,
all
parties in the
of course, as a matter of
justify
whither
/
^f""?"'
tlie Rule.
158
Bmsonsof
avoidance of the
in
duce on his
any.
but he
plaintiff's
is,
facts
may be
wear a very
as to
in fairness, en-
know what
side, if it
Facts, too,
way
be placed in a position to
different aspect to
if
what the
he knew
that if the
bill
and the evidence which is necessary to restrain prolixity and confine the proceedings to the points really
in dispute,
frittered
and that
away
its
matter before
it
But afterwards
it
bill in
some time
for
in
equity so to be framed.
became usual
to
add prayers
for
fuHMr Re-
it
however, though
Still,
to
do
this
for
it
it was usual,
was expressly
lief.
by the
And though
relief
bill (a).
plaintiff
might
still
have such
him
entitled
(ffl)
Wilkinson
o.
Beale, 4
Madd. 408,
cases
asked.
The Reu^mder
have been
could be had where
what relief
was asked by the
clearly settled as to
particular relief
159
HELIES.
further Be-
to
In some
bill.
was
relief as
cept
by amendment at
it was
In one case
have no other
cept
relief
by taking leave
(c).
The
^
of the day
the costs
be gathered,
however,
rule to
'
'
Kuieinearher cases.
'
on;
so that,
if
there
is,
to the points
'
'
'
{d),
and the
relief
prayer.
be consistent with the particular
^
In
Earl of Kinnoul v.
(J) Wilkinson v. Beale, 4 Madd. 408 (1819)
Money, 3 Sw. 202, n. (1818) Grimes . Grimes, 2 Atk. 141.
(c) Cooke V. Martyn, 2 Atk. 2 (1736). But see Red. PI. 38, n.(d).
;
Ves. 65 (1806).
Palk
v.
Clinton, 12
Eeuefaiternative or inconsistent
prayer.
Yf\\h.
160
'prf^^
at the bar,
furtMrRe.
bill as
Earlier cases
as to relief
inconsistent
with prayer.
but that,
if
that
had been
was
(e).
In
and so the
upon the
relief for
proper decree
case,
cases
is, it
is
(c) Jones
a. (1818).
clear
relief
RELIES.
161
Heutf under
is to be relied on.
In Soden v. Soden (h),
^
" Prayer for
n
t
the " facts and prayer were calculated to call upon father Re-
or equity
T
make an
election" be-
and of a settlement
and, therefore, a declaration could not be made that
she had already elected, such declaration "being inconsistent with the case made and the specific prayer."
In another case, an agreement was stated as matter
of inducement, and a will as made in execution of it
and the prayer was that the will might be enforced,
but it could not be granted and it was held, that no
other relief, founded on the agreement and inconwill
sistent
with the
will,
relief
made
This case,
widow and
relief
was
strict rules
as the Court
where an infant
;
(i)
as'toreuer'
with prayer.
162
Relief under
Prayerfor
further Re-
'
title,
and
of an account
specific
the
title
As
additional to
prayer.
held to be proper, in a
delivery of
title
it
bill
was based.
Thus,
it
to have a discovery
was
and
to ask for
(m) Stapleton
ncville, 10
(o)
Stapleton, I Atk. 6
De
Manneville
Stevens
v.
De Man-
Ves. 59,
Dormer
v.
WUlUms
e.
Shaw, 3
163
RELIES.
Prayer for
farther Re-
bill (r).
And where
plaintiff filed
bill
claiming as an
latter relief
was refused
but
it
was
(.?).
to
be
what
relied
will
upon and
the
bill
it
relief
can be
is
reuei.
is
Weymouth
(r)
Bruere
()
Field
v.
V.
e.
Boycr,
Delaney,
Eeiiefaiterinconsistent
with prayer.
164
Reiitfunier
Prayer for
be
on bottomrv,
that the bond might
and prayed
j
o
r j
fm-therRe.
set
plaintiff could
as to aitcmasistent relief,
rely
ferent (m).
And
tiffs
elegits
might be declared
(0 Glasscott
(m)
V.
Gibson,
See also
See Price
1
v.
Bemngton,
Mac.
165
BELIES.
bill,
Relief under
Prayer for
further Be-
sistontreuS.'
This case
(a:).
is
The
case of Clive
/.
v.
Beaumont ( w)
express as to Modem
is
were
suflBcient to raise
Gaugain, Cr.
&
S.
397 (1848).
(y) 1
De
G.
& Ph.
325 (1841).
cases
astoadditionai relief.
166
at present
is,
called to this
by
lessor's title]
facts
possibility,
that he
is entitled
to
which
and circum-
may
lead to
My
opinion
circumstances
disprove that,
if
may
combinations of circumstances
V.
Haydon
viz.,
Foljambe(a), and
it
it
was
v.
stated that
and no prayer as
to
it,
and
on
title
was no
title
was granted
and the
167
RELIES.
Haydon
as
efltect
the
title
The
v.
(e),
since the
Beaumont.
case of Clive
v.
{d), where
was alleged that the defendant had entered into
possession
of certain
property,
written
letter
had
was not charged or prayed
expressly that she had accepted the title, or waived
the proof of the lessor's title; and the Court said,
" The bill contains no allegation of any such waiver.
not signed), but where
The
plaintiff insists,
stated
upon the
which
it is
bill,
dence of waiver.
But there
are
many
instances in
of that which
is
it
it
title.
Wright
i;.
Griffith, 1 Ir.
(d)
Gaston
Frankum, 2
De
168
Relief under
Prayer for
further Re~
lief,
Qu. Direct
charge of
grounds of
additional
not
necessary.
relief
may
And
it
bill,
is
given to the
make
relief
in support of
facts,
used
such additional
And
same time, it
where additional
relief consistent with that prayed is asked, and no
different colour or aspect is given to the facts, and
they are not apparently stated for some other purpose, it may sometimes be suflBcient and possible to
state the facts in such a manner as to give the requisite notice to the defendant of the issue of law to be
aspect or purpose.
may be
yet, at the
above cases
of Dormer
v.
We
Fortescue, Bruere
v.
Pem-
v.
By
^
'
it is
RELIES.
bill shall
may
It
is
to,
and
Provision of
statute as to
difficult to see
what
If
it is
have other
to,
he
may
yet
would
have been simpler to enact that he should have such
relief without the prayer.
But, however that may
be, a plaintiff, who has clearly and distinctly shown
in his bill the equities and relief he intends to rely
on, could easily have asked specially for such relief.
And if a strict interpretation is put upon the terms
relief
under
it
he thinks himself
entitled to,
it
would seem to
follow that the Courts could not grant the relief which
shown he means
and which
but which
he has not specially prayed; and yet, upon the principles which formerly regulated their decisions and
the plaintiff has
it
to rely on,
by the terms of
to,
So
grant no other relief under the general prayer.
that such general prayer seems, by force of the
statute, to
useless, unless
upon the terms requiring a special prayer, but attribute to it the smallest amount of imperativeness.
And
this latter
ticular prayer
so that
L.
/I
when
Relief under
J'rayerfor
farther iie-
relief.
tice,
plaintiff's
^
general
169
if
seems
uef.
170
Prayer/or
a pravcr
for general
r
J
a
further Re-
altered
Relief under
Statute
by the
will now,
relief
such
relief,
statute,
is
un-
tor general
relief as is consistent
made by
the
whole bill (e). It is true that in that case Lord Justice Turner said, that " in cases in which plaintiffs
are not entitled to the relief specifically prayed, and
the relief to which they are entitled
the facts stated in the
bill,
is
consistent with
Lordship was
the law.
is
is
makes
it
applies.
by
is
bill
asked under
There the
plaintiff,
bill)
it
ap-
that a foreclosure
and the
damages by
and it was held,
bill
for
(e) Hill V.
(/) Nokes
V.
Fish, 3 Drew.
De
744 (1857).
G.,
M. & G. 66 {U5i).
171
to, it
be necessary to
nothing improper
in
bill
seeking alternative
^'"'f-
may
hardly
relief.
(A).
"
bill
difficult construction in
facts
to
I'aise,
culty
I find
on
of fact, and
framed with a
alternatives
In
view to alternative
it is
bills
line
alternative
may be
arrived at;
but here, unfortunately, I do not find any sufficientlyclear averments to satisfy me, one way or the other,
facts are on which the plaintiff
adjudication
of the Court, or what
the
have
wishes to
tohich
he
asks."
And again, "the
precise
the
relief
is
You have no
right to allege
two inconsistent
Rawlings
v.
v.
v.
Lambert,
John.
& Hem.
Lambert,
John.
i2
& Hem.
462 (1860).
172
Bill nrny ask
Relief.
to
wiiether Bill
can ask/or
auernatvoe
ground of vagueness.
In somc cases, where the alternative
.,
t/.
.
IS
relief
n t
sought
it
seems
inconsistent
him
to.
Ernest
v.
Vivian, 12
W.
R. 295.
173
RELIES.
whole
bill,
bill
(I).
(jn),
the
bill
on
might be
it
and
V.-C.
and
Wood
for
an account,
and
enforced
" a
which
this form,
out,
bill
in
is
it,
which used to be described as approhating and reprobating the same transaction," and he dismissed
Probably his Honor's
the bill entirely with costs.
vyords,
when taken
The
later case.
Wood
if
in
rule laid
understand them.
If a
to
show
that
it
on the
e.
Ernest
Vivian, 12
v.
Cawley
v.
Poole,
if
may
some other
an account on the
There are here no incon-
ought to be given,
(ot)
facts that
and
it
g.
W.
R. 298, 299.
Hem. &
Mil. 66.
Rem/.
174
^f^
is
sought,
'
is
the facts or
some of them
the relief
is
upon
and the pleader
Wood
relief.
seems
made
relief,
175
RELIES.
The allowance
bill.
of proper
would suffice to protect him from any oppression, and it would seem unnecessary for that purpose
to dismiss the bill entirely and drive the plaintiff to
costs
file
new
bill to
The
Though
be damaged.
it
may
perhaps be possible to
case
by the
the
whether there
is
sufficient
V.-C.
Wood.
plaintiff
It
may be
was done by
be
true.
But when he
(n) See
Marsh
v.
Keith,
Dr.
& Sm.
342.
^l^nalkfof
""/"sf'ieni
^''""^'
176
Whether Bill
can ask/or
aiternaiive
^^''''J'-
what erourd
is there for savins; that he is relying
cd
^
J
D
j
upon their being true, and upon their not being; true
at the same time, even though he do not succeed in
proving them ? This is to assume that he knew what
only the Court could determine, that if they were
proved his equity must follow. Moreover, it is often
extremely
difficult for
satisfaction of the
a plaintiff to
Court the
make out
upon an
fails
to the
allegation of fraud
and
is
for
for relying
he, because
he
in entirely
it
be thought rather,
the plaintiff, as
it
he ought
have relied on the truth of his allegations and to have doubted his law, and therefore
to be
deemed
to
RELIES.
177
had made
alleged, but
ynetiier
am
alternative
^'W^/-
The
If
native case.
Another point
,.
,-rr
dinerent
to be
.,,
native reliei
is,
Thomas
Relief cannot
he asked in
inconsistent
characters.
70
^Si"'*
around of
rraua ana
on^'^rgroundt
do so
intention to
can
that
all
manifested in the
is
bill.
This
is
fairly
made
being
bill if
And
Court
said, that
bill
it would be
be deprecated to afford any
encouragement to such allegations by allowing a
party to try the experiment of obtaining relief on
much
unjust and
1
(
some
to
if it failed,
kind of
inferior
to fall
relief."
The
dicta,
bill
how-
v. Lang, we
were charged clearly as
part of a case of fraud, and not otherwise.
And,
moreover, as to the dictum in the case of Wilde v.
(p) Ante, p.
(g)
Wilde
the fraud
or
may
164'.
v.
O'Reilly, 3 J.
&
and
facts
Gibson,
La. 240,
it
was
242,'
said, the
(r) Glasscott v.
v.
to
bill entirely,
179
BELIES.
it
In a
claimed.
still
Vice-Chan-
ii<:ii<^
can he
""*^'' ""
gnvndof
othergnunds
also.
cellor
referring to the
said,
Cottenham,
same dictum,
that prin-
" Lord
It is not, as I take
it,
the
With
In Baker
v.
Bradley
is
be
to
that qualification,
v.
Gibson."
(v),
in-
him with
the
full
not rest on
plaintiff's
bill alleges
is
not proved.
the alleged
case upon
the
But
this bill
case of fraud
only.
does
It
by the
In the
those allegations in disposing of the costs."
case of Dobson v. Lyall {w), referred to in the judg(O
Price
(u)
Espey
(v) 7
())
De
V.
Berrington, 3
v.
G.,
M. & G.
M. & G. 608.
2 Phil. 323, n.
498, 499.
180
'^ousS'
v.
and failing as to
was given on that other equity.
the fraud,
These
relief
perhaps, be considered to
Of
may be
relief that
when by such
becomes multifarious.
Some of the cases above cited, as instances where
iiinconsistent or alternative or additional reliei was
grounds/or
same Relief,
bill
sought,
may
relief
alternative or additional
show
same
was sought on
title
i>
was expressly
was said, that if plaintiffs
one or other way, they may state it in
This, moreover,
relief.
in
inconsistent,
have a
for the
it
"plaintiffs
The same
down
the rules, as
{x) Ford
V.
Clinton, Rus.
Peering,
& M.
Ves. jun. 72
112, 116.
v.
(as
seen),
where
181
RELIES.
facts showins;
^ fraud
were
Different
grounds for
me ReU
e/.
Prudent
to
the pleadings
not being
it,
relief,
may
ground,
the case
if
The whole
properly arranged.
may
And
is
to
be relied on.
aspect of
where additional
relief
would be
however, in
safer,
all cases,
to
show
\ofaeiief
\distinctly,
mean
plaintiff to rehef,
which would
that
they will
bill
make
fail
entitle the
plaintiff
ormndso/
not be stated
182
^^ tenant
^groSsof
in tail under
spoke of the
^f!^
it,
and
a subsequent place
in
of himself as issue in
tail
it
was
and
title (y).
made
And
ment of appointment
'
made
to be signed
relief
title;
an
mean
to
earlier case(&),
legally entitled.
(y) Vernon
()
(a) Balls V.
(i)
v.
Edwards
Hagley
Vernon, 2 M.
&
Cr. 171.
v.
v.
West, 3 L.
J.,
Ch. 63.
RELIES.
183
from the
nevertheless
difters
statement of
like
facts,
vagueness in a
drawing
when
reason that
ambiguously
This
may be
the
is
will,
and he there-
indefeasibly entitled to an
is
was held
up of outstanding terms, although the title of the devisor was
doubtfully stated; for only an equitable title was
necessary to support the bill (c). And so where the
bill stated an instrument, and that one or other of
two co-plaintiffs was entitled under it one as devisee and the other as heir at law, each thereby contending that it was in himself; it did, not show a
good right to bring the defendant before the' Court
because he might have different defences to make to
the case of each plaintiff, and might not be able to
But
avail himself of both in any mode of pleading.
if the bill had gone on to state an agreement entered
into between the two plaintiffs, and that under it
both had acquired an equitable title, it would have
been unobjectionable (d) though there would have
been vagueness in the grounds of relief, as it was
estate in fee simple in possession thereof,"
sufficient in
bill
(c)
Houghton
T,
(d) Cholmondeley
v.
Clinton, Rus.
& M.
112, 116.
yan'ienem
^g''V-
184
^''Sm^'''"rmV^
i^ncertain
either
The
equities or conclusions of
the relief
may
the
is
we have
then,
bill
prayed by the
bill
or in the prayer.
But,
it
should be observed,
show
fendant
may be
clusion
from the
stated,
facts
defendant
that the
may
title,
on the contitle.
may
Thus,
relief.
if
bill
the deed
may be
set aside
and delivered up
to
be
to fraud
also,
ground of relief,
e.g.,
by an executor, breach of
cases of
by a
In such cases the prayer will run thus,
" that an account may be taken of all sums of money,
&c., come to the hands of the defendant, &c., or which
wilful default
trust
trustee, &c.
insufficient to
186
RELIES.
111111
made
under undue influence, or by insane or imbecile persons, or that a person was guilty of adultery, or had
actual notice, or formally waived objections to
Now
&c.
the defect of a
bill
title,
left
would be that
it
it
and not that there was no indication of the conclusions of law to be relied on.
And this distinction
should be carefully observed
for it would be no
remedy for the defects of such a bill, that the prayer
contained a reference to the points. These charges
are material facts, and must therefore be placed in
the stating part of the bill, and distinctly put in
;
issue.
Hence we may
all
embodying them
in the prayer.
caution as to
relying on
Prayer to
show grounds
o/Reiitf.
186
CHAPTER
VI.
STATED.
The
whom
to
they
may resort
to
means of decision
in
all
future controversies,
parties" (a).
If
Plaintiff's
equity must
appear,
The
bill
bill
26, 27
Red. 42, 43
Cooper Eq.
PI. 9
Mod.
95.
be
,
useful,
will furnish
187
some
PiamHffs
must
illus-
equity
tratlOnS.
"
An
appear.
original
bill,
against
whom
the
bill
exhibited,
is
by the person
must show the
he
is
or at least
is
spect or property
(c).
-T
IP
'
right to sue.
should be shown.
In doing
this,
it
suit,
has to be con-
sidered whether the rights of the plaintiff are absolute, that is, against all the
is,
world
or relative, that
way
them
all
by stating his interest in the subject matter out of which they flow and it will depend
upon the cause of complaint how far the facts of his
title must be set out.
Where he complains of an
to state
title
or
(J)
(c)
Clarke
Red
37.
(d) Ivy
V.
is,
7 Jur.,N.S.483, 639;
/
[
WHAT
Title to sue.
on such
his interest
and
and
title,
show that
sufficiently to
must
set out
his title
is
defendant's.
If his rights are against the defendant only
is,
if
that
which the
interests of
both arise
or
if
the interests
the. interests
of
common
The wrong
done or the
rights
claimed.
source.
Jurisdiction,
jurisdiction
Periormance
of conditions
precedent,
may be
inferred.
The
bill
&c.
the defendant
Thus, in a
bill to
redeem a mortgage,
it is
neces-
what
shall
be found due on
189
STATED.
And it has
been held, not to be sufficient to ask in the prayer
that a reconveyance may be ordered, " on the plaintaking the accounts, or offer to redeem.
ofsertopay.
payi!5g
to
tiff,
And
offer (d).
right to sue is
behalf.
bill to
stand in the
Some
way
of
away
^^^^fj
s"*'*-
relief.
may be
important as
take
'^''^^
And
suit.
costs.
do not
with
regard to the costs, there should also be stated everything which tends to show that the defendant has
claim.
^-
111
v.
Ground
for
inquiries,
i.
is
in
most cases
accounts, &c.
to be laid.
WHAT
190
Ground for
inquiries, accounts, &c. to
be laid.
and may be
settled,
learned by consulting
But an inquiiy will not be
fully
(e).
'
And
it
is
laid
in the plead-
any
vestigations,
Inquiry as to
title in suit
for specific
performance.
bill.
is
accepted the
Accounts.
Against
And
title.
trustee
him
inquiring into
stated (/).
And
executor,
so,
&c,, mort-
gagee.
liable to account,
But
if
Court
will
Thus
it
an
HoUoway
r.
Millard,
Madd.414.
f.
Mayor
of Norwich,
WHAT
191
wilful default,
Accounts.
wrongly e.^.,
is
stated
is
proved.
The
extent, however,
full
and,
Court
in distrusting
we have
are strangers,
is
a sufficient reason
Where
him.
the parties
The
relationship,
however,
'
{h).
between a mortgagee in
.
count
make
out a special
This is a protection to a mortgagor who is complexly in the power of the mortgagee, and without
the means of knowing accurately the manner in
which the latter has managed the property. As the
mortgagor is not a mere trustee, but has wider
powers and is entitled to make a profit out of his
position, and has hostile interests, which by entering
into possession he has asserted, the case
made
esta-
authorizes this
(g) Sandford
v.
Coope
possession.
or, in
Ibid. 496;
Against
mortgagee in
Seymour,
v.
I.
Moll. 181
Carter, 21 L. J.,
Travers
v.
Townshend,
PI. 184.
WHAT
192
Accounts.
Against
mortgagee in
ledge
possession.
what the
No
(z).
more within
lie
presumption
know-
his
is
But where
by
e.g., cases
of dilapidation or deterio-
no inquiry or account
will
be
and
where the
so,
bill
provements on the ground that they were not necessary, a special case
bill (l),
an
"
it is
an award.
count
for
or that events
(m),
by
award (o),
the
will
not be sufficient to
make
And
made
so, to
have a receiver
the facts
and
j>)
appointed,
is
equities relied
bill.
(i)
Dobson
(It)
Batchelor
v.
Powell
V.
Trotter, 1 Dr.
(m) Bowles
v.
Orr,
(k) Frietas
v.
Dos
Santos,
(/)
Sandon
v.
Hooper, 6 Beav.
Y.
&
Kouth
& Sm.
388.
C. 461.
1
Y.
&
C. 574
Kinder
24'8
V.
(p) Dawson
Yates,
Beav. 301
2 Jur. 960.
v.
Lord Ash-
of accounts
STATED.
193
is sufficient,
according to
its
AcmuMs.
practice, to
award
With regard
and so
to opening
errors, the
These
sity
{q).
But
falsify,
it (r).
decrees
made by
special facts
must be
stated
Johnson
Beav. 252;
V.
Latimer,
Wellen, 10
(r)
v.
by a mortgagee
De Montmorency
1 Jur.
W.
Coleman
980; Sim
v.
v.
in possession,
Shepherd v. Morris, 4
& Wal. 119 Jones
Devereux, Dr.
Sim, 11
Ir.
Ch. R. 310
Newen
t>.
R. 745.
.,.
Mellersh, 2
for
see S.
C, and
opening or surcharging
may
K.
ractstoco"^'
194
Facts to
obtain discovery and
save proof.
WHAT
incline the
conduct, and
against him.
may
enable the
plaintiff to obtain
it
may
dispose of
all
the rights of
all
the parties
and do complete
justice, and so that the orders of the Court may be
safely executed by those who are compelled to obey
them, and future litigation may be avoided (s). This
will necessitate the statement of the facts which show
the interests of such parties.
Sometimes it will be
needful only to bring before the Court certain persons occupying a representative position as trustees,
executors, &c.
and the facts showing such character
must appear. Sometimes a plaintiff may have a right
of suit notwithstanding he is represented by some
trustee or other such person, and then he must state
interested in the subject matter
subject matter
suit.
in respect of
it
make him
ject matter
must be
be understood as
relating to the subject matter of controversy only,
()
parties, is to
(<)
Id. 188.
WHAT
195
subsequent
as
interests
Parties.
assignees,
ot"
controversy,
it,
by mistaking the
On
seem
of
Thus a
suit
may
may
be limited, but
to
terests
the
all
parties in the
will,
may
is
all
parties interested in
may
interested in
testator,
that, a
been paid, and the other moiety of the residue appropriated specifically and invested upon the trusts of
k2
stated to be ascertained; f
\
)
196
Parties.
limited
it
was
The
the fact.
(w).
several defendants,
suit against
At
nothing to do.
that
if
that which
each defendant
is
it
will
be apparent
is
same general
the
right,
though the
some
being parties
As
to the
should
be
(v).
made
which do not
interests
same
,
who ought
be
to
all
the
persons having
be on the
any of such parties
conflict should
and
plaintiffs
defendants,
or
co-plaintiffs
if
refuse to be such, an
must be put
in the
bill,
and
way
remarks,
it
will
&
16 Vict.
c.
it
pro-
of the
15
Some
86,
s.
The
provisions of the
have
in
many
cases simplified
Finally,
it must be remembered that the nlaintiff
'
j
,
can only nave renei secundum aUegata et probata of
{u)
Hutchinson
v.
Townsend,
Keen, 675.
bill ().
pentionis (w).
on
197
Decree
m Case
relief
may
his bill
disclose facts
given (y).
,.
If,
wheninquiry
allowed 33 to
facts not in
issue.
to his election
whether he
will
have his
bill
dismissed
And
Whaley
240
Williams
v.
Barton
266
(mj)
v.
v.
u.
Norton,
Vern 483
Llewellyn, 2 Yo.
Dawson
Yates,
;
&
C, on
Williams
appeal, 1125;
v.
v.
Gordon,
Maltby, 6
Montesquieu
<^.
Houghton
Reynolds, 2 Hare,
Wy.
Phelps
V.
264
v.
Knox
v.
Gye, 12
Purssey, 3
W.
R.
De G. & Sm.
Prothero, 2
;
Hayward
68
J.
v.
145; S.
;
Gordon
399
in all cases it
Bennett
De
G.
&
Hill
v.
Filkin,
WHAT
198
Decree on
Ouj
plcadino'S
(a).
T
"
it
of the
justice
Inquiry as t4
facts not in
issue.
It
,
i-
^i_
j-
amendment and
direct no
issue,
it,
as, for
the
title
by
amendment.
stated
in issue
(a)
1
Coop. 480
M'Mahon v. Burchell,
et seq., 582.
(6) The cases referred to in the last note, so far as they support
the granting of an inquiry, relate chiefly to specific evidence, admissions and conversations, not themselves expressly put in issue, though
relate,
Darnley
Gossip
V.
London, Chatham
Wright,
(c) Platel V.
1
Beav. 445
&
Id. 634.
Cradock,
Watts
v.
C. P. Cooper, 481
412.
Holden
v.
Hearn,
mil
STATED,
<.
/.
199
amended
may be further
interrogated as to them.
had never
bill
save
co-defendant; the
bill
said that
what
interrogate
amended
as
bill (e).
(rf)
Attwood
(e)
Seeley
v.
V.
facts in avoid-
Boehm, 2 Mad.
176.
WHAT
200
Decree on Case
made,
only.
/
/
!
on
bill
gata
^
et
cation,
will
repli-
be in the mode
of proof.
It
may
may be more
Rules as to evidence, than
New
there are
comes
to a hearing,
may
respectively rely
(_/).
201
CHAPTER
VII.
The
is
bill,
for
the purpose of
up
To
it is
in
from the civil law. The bill was the libellus articulatus, and contained the statement of the plaintiff's
position and interrogatories founded thereon, and a
prayer for relief. The answer was the responsio, and
contained the defence and the answers to the interrogatories,
and
it
bill.
To
bill.
all
put
re-
The
k5
pretences.
202
SmS
pretences.
all
of g^jh matters
(it
the
it
bill
to render
bill
on the ground
vFas, in
unnecessary where
all
bill
were
admitted or contested
(6).
However
that
may
be,
joinder in issue
The
(c).
to the exceptio,
the
bill
bill
The
defence, therefore,
to a hearing
found
sufficient in
;
It might,
(6) 2 P.
Uom.
Wms.
97.
Rom. 45.
5064, 95.
(c)
Gilb. For.
(<J)
Ibid.
203
common
Court by means of
Now
it
special
This practice
(e).
is
would
re-aflfirm, as sufficient
special replica-
and true,
all
the
bill,
-the
the answer.
manner again
The
special
insist
upon
and
And
so on.
ultimately be heard
upon the
admitted.
the
bill
And just
where the
so,
amended
bill
and
(e)
facts are
added to
upon
by amendment,
in the
Gilb. For.
all
109, 110.
204
EepUcatoiy
charges and
pretences.
bill,
i
i
j
iX.
not exprcssly admitted by the amendments or tne
i
j.
answers.
But
fence,
if the, plaintiff
by plea of some
bill
why
(for
the purposes of
by any subsequent
the whole
all
If the legal
done by setting it down to be argued, for if a replication were filed the validity of the plea in law was
admitted (g). The special replication, rejoinder and
subsequent pleadings were then directed to subvert
or support the truth and sufficiency of the facts contained in the plea alone.
Thus facts would successively be introduced to avoid the previous pleading,
or by way of inducement to a special traverse {h) of
its
allegations,
work
to
injustice
by prohibiting
strictly as
a pleader from
em-
and
the truth of
contest
all
and
Similarly, an
to
have been
down
set
to
205
it
EepUcatory
pretences.
The
plea to the
And
this
plea.
plea,
so of
manner
amendment
ments and
amended
pleas,
bill
all
the facts
If then,
the
plea, therefore, to
an amended
of,
bill
must contain
matters in that
all
or inconsistent with,
the plea.
It
might seem,
therefore, that
it
would be as con-
of the
bill,
the
work
it
setting
will
it
down
for argument,
when,
if
he
fails in his
(l).
It
became,
(i)
(0
Id.
undertakes
to reply,
bill
206
Eepucatory
pretences.
Same time
by means of
And if the defence was thus antimet by replicatory charges, so that the
bill itself embodied the matter that would have been
contained in an original bill and its amendments by
way of replicatioh, &c., it is clear that the plea must
also amalgamate the original plea and matter of rejoinder, &c., or else the replicatory matter would not
be traversed or avoided, and the plea would not be a
complete defence. On this account the plea must
law.
its effect in
cipated, and
And
is
and truth of
suflBciency
to the
plaintiff.
Moreover,
the' plea, as
under the
civil
law, so also
ground
why
some
to
in
single
it is
trial
all
civil
law
the discovery
The
plea
upon oath
and matter
amended
Now
it
may
may
207
J.
nn
iT,.^
whole
This
bill (m).
is
And hence a
expedited.
RepUcatory
charges and
it pretences,
may be
With
regard to charging matter inconsistent with an anticipated plea, we have in a previous page suggested
some considerations
Though,
(n).
may
it
would be
sufficient useoftue
to inference
alone,
and
to leave
or so to leave to in-
to
indicate the
And
hence
it
grove, 2 Sim.
&
Stu. 4; Harris
v.
traverse at law.
208
office
respect to
(considered in
the purposes
Pretences to
-T)ut claims in
issue.
it
we have
seen,
it is
For, as
which
be
sufficient.
therefore
and to
raise it as
an
issue,
is
to raise
an issue as
to
is
bill
As
Ferraby
(})
when
v.
Gregory
o.
Glasscott
v.
209
he attained twenty-one " this was as full a determination against the plaintiff [under the circumstances of the case, which are not fully reported] as
;
if a
was not
because the pretence " was the common
and only way of bringing on the question [whether
the legacy of M. M. had lapsed], and, therefore,
entitled,"
sufficiently
the decree
was allowed
to
be pleaded as a bar to
are,
howwhen
Pretences of
conclusions of
lawputno
fact in issue.
Thus, in a redemption
stated.
suit,
the plaintiff
may
stance involves
its
relief
to raise
an issue upon
prayed by the
decision.
bill in
sub-
involve
may sometimes
made a
Pretence of a.
claim puts
fact ot claim
in issue.
210
Then
the
an
interest),
and renders
it
incumbent upon
if so,
When
grounds of
claim should
be stated.
suit.
If,
how-
interest in the
is), it
may be advisable to
way in which we
title
against
can
in a full
claims
by open
and
disclaimer,
answer to the
bill {t).
And
acts disturbing or
threatening to
Discoverv
charges.
claiming such
Court
charge in a foreclosure
suit,
them
the
parties
Thus, the
common
Ante,
It is
used to found
to the existence
p. 127.
(0 Graham
v.
() Red. 319.
Coope, 9 Sim. 93
M.
&
Cr. 648.
and
may be brought
all
211
proper parties
is
unnecessary
information
there
is
is
Having
or foreclose
to be allowed to
is
redeem
all
be informed by the defendant who such parthey may be brought before the Court,
and "enable him to obtain a compleat decree" ().
The Courts would not formerly, however, allow any
and
to
it
()
() Ante, p. 132
115
Hudson
Marsh
v.
8 Jur., N. S. 874.
Story,
Eq.
PI. 33, n.
W.
R.
Discovery
'*'"^^'
212
Discovery
bill
given
an example of such
demption
suit),
issues
of fact are
raised by
" charges to
the contrary.'
An
raised
for relief,
ground of
relief
to
By
(c)
Houghton
Lee, 10 Jur. 40
amount
to
if
there were
a charge that
fine.
v.
...
213
Ferraby
conciled
different
Hobson, some of the cases may be rewhich at first sight appear to lay down
rules as to the effect of a charge " that the
v.
contrary
it
it
raises
claim.
relief
In conclusion,
title
it
depend on such
title
pretences tmd
iranied.
does not
defendant's knowledge.
(c),
v.
May,
n.
Rey-
where only
sought.
214
CHAPTER
VIII.
amended
pass on to
bills,
a few words
as to answers
We
Answer as a
that
is,
shall
bill
by
the defendant, and he rests his defence upon the untruth of them, he
to answer,
'
all
the
relies
(J).
But
it
may be
doubtful whether
it is
As we have
seen,
to contest,
it
formally
21c
The
parts of Answer
it
ma
H'ew matter
how stated
tendered in issue
prove
to
its
all
assertions in such
just as a party
plaintiff's assigning a
"probatory terra"
Rom. 45
lub6, Eq.
PI.
105
bill
parts of the
all
and
all
their sufficiency in
a).
would "aver, maintain and prove" that the bill was " true
law to be answered unto," and the answer " untrue and insufficient in the law to be replied unto," ..." all which
this repliant will be ready to aver, maintain and prove as this honorable Court shall direct" (see form, Hinde, Ch. Pr. 285
Willis, Eq.
plaintiff
and
sufficient in the
PI.
Thus
it still
tendered in issue
then
its effect,
we must look
it
it
XVII.
to the previous
tenders in issue.
That
will
r. 2).
it
in fact a
traverses, unless
is
To understand
bill as it specifically
216
^'mem"' ^^"^^ rules as a
That
bill
is,
and must be
suflBciently particular,
title,
and
to facts
more within
his
knowledge; and
must appear
in answer.
It
may
its
to
and he
Gen. Ord.
is
will,
If the
the defendant
is
mitted which
is
all
the
bill will
be ad-
general traverse will not serve to remedy the defect in the answer.
is
the
we have been
if
the rule
spectively.
considering.
It might, perhaps,
parties
may
hill
different
or answer re-
have been
verify the
all
ANSWERS
A.ND PLEAS.
more indulgent
Though
to a defendant
217
the Courts are
than to a
plaintiff,
Answer as a
on
The
(c).
may
defendant
set
"^
up
^
different
but
may
defences oMerentae
on
fences
,,
make
not
in- ^""^
by way of defence,
his
as
Where
itself.
must show
what is the view of the facts upon which it relies
and if one view is advanced, another cannot be urged
it
at the hearing
ce)
It,
(rf).
And
310, 352.
to
suffi-
et seq.
see Faulder
mentative, though
however, appears to be
Red. 298, 309
v.
it is
man
t.
Beaver,
in issue
v.
in the
main
Burchell,
Dunn
v. Calcraft,
298
p.
M'Mahon
Watkins
v.
v.
Burchell.
And
v.
M'Mahon
Stu. 56;
is
Whaley
Norton,
Wms. 276;
Vern. 483,
L.
w.
v.
an inquiry
Watkins, 2 Atk. 96
It is
&
v.
n. 1, as to certainty in
Ch. 145.
2 Sim.
Y.
&
'*^''-
C. Ex.
the state-
''*
"'
defence
must
"e shown.
>
218
Answer ua a
is
substantially raised
by the
Defence.
is
not expressly
answer to a
Thus, in
up
bill to set
stated acts
to his pre-
Defenee on
facts stated
by
plaintiff.
Notice of the
facts
and
grounds of
defence to be
given.
case, the
is
also,
tainty {h),
stated.
but, otherwise,
of
that
facts in issue
Evidence
need not be
plaintiff notice
it
will
must
the defendant
(i).
He
must, in
The
case of
Ormes
(/) Stanley
&
Beadel, 2
v.
De
Kobinson,
& J. 333.
& M. 527 Marsh v. Russell,
G., F.
R.
My.
Cr. 43.
(g) Ibid.
(ft)
(j)
&
M.
Ante, p. 217.
. Borwell, 10 Sim. 382
Harrison
(j) Baker
347
Stanley
v.
Robinson,
R.
527.
361
Athill, 2 Anst.
Hardman
v.
1 Moll.
219
,.-
issue was,
to
parte paterna.
far as
to
title
ex
have (so
by the other
He
bill said he claimed.
answered that he did claim such title and was bound
to answer no more, though if he had failed in his
other defences, he might have failed also on this for
the
title
bill,
a consideration of
Pretences,
met.
must be had.
Where
Where
some
particular of
it,
the
bill,
new
l2
matter.
Such-
2_
220
Armer at a
pretcnces,
we have
to
be
answered.
met.
stated in
and
to
charge for
upon the
no such
exists,
this
and, therefore,
it
will
is
entitled
its
is
entitled to
upon which
such
lien is
extent of
decree
may be made
(0 Ante,
The
report
(n).
^
are
facts
by
this
221
means
indirectly ^n'''<"
'^
JHscovery.
put upon the record, and the decree is, upon the face
of the record, founded upon the alleyata et probata,
if
direct
and
and
ficient.
bill to
specifically
"
answer
no answer
is
must be
and particular
answered (o). An in-
or traversed,
interrogated
is
negative pregnant
is
at all(p).
Mont. Eq.
Whitby, T.
&
R. 366, ante,
p.
197.
331 V.
PI. 184,
(n.),
(p) Gregor
(})
195
v.
179, u. 56,
Discovery.
222
iAvMxrata and
In
Certainly" (o).
fact,
the defendant
must take
to remark, that
implied in a
we have
it is
bill
which
seen, every
it is
main
As
many a suborof common sense, it is
intended to traverse.
fact implies
rule
would only
is
part of
I
/^
it,
it
it),
must
traverse,
(following the
ft)
sum
23
(?)
Gen. Ord.
XV. r.
(r)
Faulder
and
it
v.
would be
2.
Moore
o.
Edwards, 4 Ves.
avoidance of
223
or he
must
state
W'jfwe'- as a
Diseover^i
[these
two
latter
he
may
traverses"], or
where no exception
is
interrogated to.
impertinent
(s).
Minute
sufficient
deemed
the answer
lie
is
sub-
(0/ but
Con. Ord
(i)
Reade
v.
15,
r. 3.
224
Anmerasa
Jjtscovery.
gations in the
must answer
but
bill (y),
now
it
appears that he
interrogatories as to
all
all
things or the
made by
the
bill,
allegations or not().
knows nothing
to,
tinctly; " I
do not know."
says he " believes" anything averred by the
will
bill,
this
it
seems
title
this
of the
own acts,
As t the
if it
act of another,
know, he ought
or thinks
it
heard
(m)
it
be
to
(z)
be
to
true, or
and not
true,
to say only,
that
he has
(6).
Earp
V.
Lloyd, 4 K.
(x) Bridgewater
(y)
to say,
&
(o) Potter
V.
58.
12
W. R.
40.
Jur.,
(6) Hinde,
J.
De Winton,
226:
'
demur
or
Anmer.
Answer must
xie full.
He
relates (J).
file
interrogatories
them where
it
would be inconvenient
to set
petenaanfs
tones.
Documents.
them out
at length
mation sought
(c).
(i) Great
Bleckley
Leigh
V.
1321.
(c) Turney
(d) IS
(e)
236
575
&
v.
v.
415
Drake
v.
u.
86,
s.
R. 633.
19.
Lefevre
26 L.
J.
W.
Bayley, 12
16 Vict.
Telford
v.
Ruskin,
W.
v.
Taylor,
&
R. 85
Sim. 401
Price, 291.
L 5
J.
Dr.
;
267; 3 Jur., N. S.
& Sm.
148, 8
White
Bally
i>.
W.
R.
Williams, 8
Kenrick, 13
"Craves leave
to refer."
226
inff^r
reference or admission as to a
cravesieave
crave
The
case of
even though
it
related
(/) 2 M.
&
K. 732.
Cox
V.
bill.
227
Anmer.
Ground
tor
inquiries to
be stated.
special
legal
proceedings in
defence of his mortgage, &c., will entitle him to inquiries in taking the accounts, these not being in-
ground is laid
showing that de-
The
facts
and
for this
purpose
letters
should often be
set out.
"
and indeed
is
considered as forming
part of the
-^
^
bill is
con-
bill.
answer.
answer to an amended
bill,
is
it
other-
(i)
The defendant
(J) Connop
{k)
(7)
(ot)
cannot, after
Red. 318.
33.
Suppiementaa
answers and
(^
first answer to
amended bill,
amend-
228
^^^
ment of the
already answered
to amend, but
must apply
a supple-
answer resting
which the
pleading proper and the discovery are separated, and
That
take-the form of a plea and answer in support.
seen, is a special
is
(w), in
is
(o),
because,
is
bill
'
the decree, so as to
show
and
determined as are raised in second suit (/>). If, however, the plea be of a foreign judgment, it would be
proceedings and judgment, and
same matters and issues were in
(,q).
companied by an answer,
And
it
if
the plea
is
ac-
Johnstone, 2 Sch.
(o)
Carew
(p)
( j)
v.
CI.
&
&
part
or discovery
relief
229
it
is
applied (r)
law
if it
can cover
it
But
(s).
intentionally cover
still
more of
by
{t).
to
answer as a pleading, and an answer by way of discovery, apply to the plea and answer in support {v).
But care must be taken to traverse or avoid all those
things in the
though
plea,
bill
it
be
will
sufficient
if,
as to the aver-
fully in
posed (w).
And
it
to
bill
inconsistent with
bill
was
(*) Ibid.,
(i)
v.
Hewitt, 11
W.
K.
849.
(a) Dell V. Hale, 2
()
Y.
&
C. C. C.
Hardman
Sim.
1.
&
ii.
EUames,
v.
M. & K. 739
Pennington
v.
The
Beechey, 2
plea must be
Kirkman
Faulder
v.
v.
but
Red. 244.
f.
it
v.
Drew, 2 Ves.
it will
&
be
B. 159
Piea.
230
Plea-
among such
ficient
any
was held
suf-
intestate
same defence
is
not raised by
made by
is
answer, the
(w);
but the
j
gist 0/ Suit, /and answers
and that is, that matters oi law which
,
how pleaded.
'
do not go
pleaded.
,,
ought to be specially
Thus, the Statute of Limitations, or the
V.
Drew. 432.
(z) Holding
W.
11
W.
R. 356.
v,
v.
v.
Jur.,
N.
S.
Barton, 1 Sm.
&
v,
686
Moodie
Bannister, 4
And
face of
law
is
shows the
it
deducible,
however, the
If,
bill
must be
upon the
common
sufficient,
is
Anmer.
"\
facts
a general demurrer
231
{b).
in answer^
statute oj
said statute as if he
bill."
the defence to be
made
we have
in issue
&c.
claim,
(c),
as the
statutes
those
concluding words.
neither
Indeed,
useful
nor
the plea
is
((i).
(e),
(a) Philips
V.
Philips, 10
Prance
v.
Sympson,
(A)
and
Wood
v.
Harrison
(d)
huU,
(e)
Lincoln
v.
and so
W. R.
Midgley, 23 L.
(e)
236.
Kay, 678, as
J.,
to Statute of Limitations
Wright, 5
Jur.,
N.
may be pleaded
may the Statutes of /
in,
S. 1142.
232
AfiBwer.j
Limitations (/).
make
if
any
must ap-
decree.
(/) Snead
v.
Green, 10
W.
R. 36.
(g) Ibid.
(A) 7 Jur.,
N.
S.
1094; S. C. on app., 10
W. R.
236.
233
CHAPTER
AMENDED
When
IX.
BILLS.
plaintiff
put in issue
sufficient facts to
it,
The
bill,
and wheis,
or will
entitled.
replication
will put
in issue the facts stated in Amended
^
*
till,
amendment of the
bill
by
the evidence, or
allegations of the
bill,
or
make
(a)
But
The same
if it is
heard on
bill
is
admitted to be
when
necessaiy.
AMENDED
234
^\i
^ ^
^A'
fi
relief,
is
entitled to,
and asking
it
if
^':'
he
.J
-.'
^"j
'
BILLS.
-^
1.
\^
on the
and
plaintiff's allegata,
finally dispose,
upon
In these
r\\V
issues raised.
the
in
matter in issue, or to
bill
make
to
out a
an amend-
new case
for
relief (c).
When
Amended
framed.
amendment
the
is
made
for the
purpose of
bill,
and
in
it
is
manifestly conve-
bill
some
to
extent,, to
(c)
Ante, p. 197.
(d)
Dan. 382.
(e) Fitzpatrick
(/) Willis
V.
v.
Power,
Evans, 2 Ball
&
B. 225.
v.
AMENDED
235
BILLS.
And
in his answers.
that the
in such a case
it
would seem
pretence
the insufficient answer of the defendant, and insist,
that if he would look into his accounts, &c., the facts
'
'
i\
j'
>
^
:/^
by araenddefence, either alone or together with new matter, it '"'is manifest that some of the former allegations,
charges and prayers must sometimes be withdrawn
"^
or
qualified,
case.
And
will not
and that
bill,
be allowed to
be necessary sub-
will
it
frame a new
stantially to
plaintiff
frame of his
what
(g) Seeley
it is
will
v.
not of so
Boehm, 2 Mad.
Ibid.
v.
much
importance to
be considered as an
Nickson, 11
An
170.
interrogatory
Id.
W. R.635
in-
alteration of the
N. R.
54.
may be
236
AMENDED
frame of the
suit
BILLS.
means
to continue
it,
is entitled.
siderable
important
portion,
plaintiff liable
to
when
it
to costs
come
been
by the
original suit,
to a hearing without
and
if
and he ought to
no worse position when an amendment is
allowed, unless, from the fact of his being in the
possession of documents, &c. relating to the matter
and refusing information, the plaintiff is driven to
some uncertainty in his pleadings, and yet has a good
case, which he states with some approach to certainty
and on some prima facie grounds (0entitled to a decree with costs;
be put
Amendment
to obtain
benefit of
admissions to
original biil.
in
of filing a
new
bill, is
bill,
instead
bill.
These
be part of the pleadings, where the suit is
amended, and will, together with the answer to the
will
(k)
Monck
(i)
Ibid.
ti.
AMENDED
amended
bill,
237
BILLS.
but they
new
The
suit (n).
on proof of mistake or
obtain
put in a supplemental
surprise,
answer
leave to
,-i
of the original
One
-.
IP
Amendments
statute of
Limitations.
^
show how a
may be
suit
'J
real case,
'
very
illustrations
of new cases
dif- made by
amended
ferent,
performance of an agreement, and the answer admitted an agreement but different from that stated
the
stating
bill,
and the Court did not dismiss the bill, but ordered
the plaintiff to pay the costs of so much as he had
abandoned {q).
Again, where plaintiff filed a long bill seeking,
amongst other things, partition of a close, and by
all
B. 225.
(5)
Mavor
-v
bill.
by
Dry, 2 Sim.
&
Stu. 113.
8e
bill.
AMENDED
238
luustrations
of new cases
made by
amended
BILLS.
Lord Henley
iij stand,j
amendment should
but that the defendant should pay five pounds by
way of penalty beyond the sum of twenty shillings
Ordered that the order for
bill.
bailiff or
against a person
alleging that he
possession
in
was
of
the property,
in possession as mortgagee,
and
if
off,
and
in
paid
other co-heirs.
On
this the
plaintiff
amended her
and asked an account and delivery of the property; she still alleged that the defendant was in
possession, but in another way, viz., under a deed
which was fraudulent and void," and prayed an
account of the rent and a reconveyance, &c. It was
held, that this was not a mere fishing bill, framed for
bill,
(r)
Dent
(s)
Smith
(0 22
v.
Wardel,
V.
Dick. 339.
AMENBED
239
BILLS.
J-/TT_
ditierent, to
1
for
that the
(m),
one
purpose and then by amendment turn it into a bill
for a totally opposite purpose ; thus, a person cannot
file
bill to
ment turn it
same deed;"
it is
set aside
file
bill for
was said
yet, as
in
Parker
v.
Nickson,
all he
change
the
frame
cannot
plaintiff
all
The
useless.
costs,
bill
however, occasioned
by
was
And,
bill
defendant's possession,
bill
V.
aright at
first.
it
(j)
luustrations
ofnewcases
amended bill,
Tr^
was no reason
that there
.1
V.
10 Sim. 284.
240
AMENDED
BILLS.
and the
amendment (after demurrer) alleged, that the codicilwas not the testamentary disposition of the testator,
and prayed an issue devisavit vel non, and, if it should
be shown that the bill was invalid as to real estate,
that the plaintiff might have the relief pi-ayed by the
original bill and the Vice-Chancellor held, that, by
reason of the demurrer, the defendant had got the
redress he required as to costs, and the amendment
:
was allowed.
Alternative
relief according to original
or amended
*>'"
amendment
If' howcver,' au
is
made by adopting
.
relief,
according to the
as
Bills of dis-
covery.
used once
bill for
(b).
It
to
precluded the
rehef also, or a
discovery only
(it
pi'ay discovery
want
bill for
title
was
()
V.
&
v.
Lynch, 2 Sch.
B. 369.
and then
to
add a prayer
for
Lindsay
2 Ball
Allen
really entitled,
Dan. 383385.
AMENDED
BILLS.
241
little
In
fact, if
is
misrepresented,
most
cases,
more reason
cases of
bills
relief,
more
for a
stringent rule
in
bills for
by an
different
to
Red. 184, n. ()
(d) Dan. 383385.
(c)
Dan. 383.
Biusofms-
242
AMENDED
BILLS.
mb-l
sequent to I
origiiiidbmJ
\
sequent to the
filing
But
bill.
of the
bill
bound
if
matter sub-
was material
to put
it
to the
into
his
And where
the
it
bill
by amendment
was amended
of his
before
Plea to
made by
that
amendment
the original
some material
bill,
fact
came
to his
knowledge
show
after
filing
(e)
5 Sim. 457.
N. C. 506,
Matthews, 1 Madd. 566.
(A) Ferguson v. Fatten, Hayes, 328.
(t) 15 & 16 Vict c. 86, B. 53.
{k) 2 Atk. 155 ; Red. 299, 304.
(I) Morg. Ch. Ord. 428.
(/)
1 Coll.,
(g) Knight
V.
AMENDED
Where
243
BILLS.
title, as,
for
-n
-I
inchoate uue
completed by
facts
completing his
ment
upon such
entirely
now be
s.
fact (m),
53.
biir,\Answer8
to
\
-
substance, or
is
It is
inquiry
case to which
Sufficient will
he
11
-11
original
bill
11
f^""
Amenoment.
The exact
!/.
plaintiff;
'
r
...
11
and then
it
may
unknown
T
11 a
to
be expedient that he
it is
called, that
is,
for
ments which,
if
way
his case,
() Id. 751.
patticulare are
should plead
should
was, or the
where
unknown,
loeseiy atarst.
244
^i^^tii
Bo^.
whereparticulars known,
prolixity to
be avoided in
original bill,
AMENDED
BILLS.
When matter
atiiratto
avoid plea.
if
is
Thus, where a
letters or
con-
bill.
And so equitable matter in avoidance
should sometimes be alleged. But if the facts are
only inconsistent with the plea as a matter of. fact,
original
(o)
O'Haia
1).
Creagh, L.
& T.
65, Ir.
AMENDED
243
BILLS.
may
it
trial
wm simuia
mi, ^c
intended to be
letters are
costs
Letters.
has no opportunity
may
is
/.
it
them
as generally as possible at
the de-
If he does not
accurately
his case,
which he cannot
disputing the case.
by
first, lest
know
them,
retract,
The
bill
120122, U9,
v.
Martin, 3 Beav.
150.
22f5,
wicrc
proof
^ details
aoubtfui,
Should plead
looseiyat
246
ynatsimuM
Ite
in original
^'". *
AMENDED
and expense to
'
state
them
BILLS.
fully at once,
and
/
full
inten'o-
answer
admitting them.
Final record
should contain full and
strong state-
ment.
And
on the
plaintiff's part,
his case,
(gr)
Ves. 247.
247
CHAPTER
X.
DEMURRERS.
DEMURRER
?'''"
(for the
pleaded in the
it
applies
bill,
it
bill,
makes no
all
which
to
made
Court.
It
it
bill.
Nor does
it
positively alleged.
scan the
ad-
e. g., if
bill
of
' '
demurrer.
\
I
248
DEMUHRERS.
L^ects in
maiter of
Form.
bill,
or a supplemental
by the Court
the
bill
in certain, cases
or
if
the allegations of
no such proper
as the rules of the Court
certainty, or there is
Must be
raiaed
equity, &c.,
offer
require,
by de-
mun'er.
to
in form, and, as
and
do
all
a general
rule,
if
Court
When may
be waived.
if necessary,
rightly
before the
(a).
would be
and
And, indeed, the Courts do
not favour demurrers on technical grounds, which
evince an intention to avoid the merits of the case (6).
to procure
May
be
matter of
substance
little
delay.
also.
of revivor
(a)
is filed
Mutter
V.
instead of an original
Dan. Ch. Pr. 517
Chauvel, 5 Russ. 42
Stuart
v,
bill,
a plea of
Burrowes,
Dru. 275.
DEMURRERS.
249
J
by a demurrer
the plamtifF were forced to resort to
an original
bill.
Again,
if
the
bill is
btfauin
matter of
Po"n-
when affects
sSom^b?*
means, and that the plaintiff can state the matter demra.
with certainty, and will do so directly the objection
is stated,
only
respect of the
in cases
But
no certain or
a demurrer
made
definite case is
at
all,
but
it is
is
<?'-A|^
It will
the discovery
may
defendant can
make a
relief to
which
^'^^"
-mien to be
the
bill,
bill,
Webb
Stu. 439
Sim.
&
V.
England, 29 Beav. 44
Jones
Stu. 527
v.
;
Hill
Strickland
v.
v.
Reardon, 2 Sim.
Bensley
c
O
v.
&
Eurdon, 2
murrer.
250
DEMURRERS.
pe/ecis t
defence ;
fully.
"When ^lot to
be r^ed Jjy
complicated state of
demurrer.
different colour,
perhaps
or if
(the
it
it
title,
without prejudice to
In Brooke
hearing (c).
Hewitt
v.
(<f), it
was
said
"a
neat,
In
at the hearing."
"
said, that
it is
title
is
bill
Kemp
v.
Pryor
(e).
Lord Eldon
it is
(c) Brooke
446
Hope
v.
(^)
Hope
V.
DEMURRERS.
law
legal right at
titles
ingly,
on demurrer
it
may
{g), the
The Court
allowed.
is
(/<).
2S],
i^J^
by demurrer.
But should a demurrer
objection
lie,
tioned,
it
clearly
may sometimes
interest to resort to
it,
may
fail
bill in
may be
able to dis-
by
plea, to set
As
as well as that
bill.
it may be either
General demurrers are when
general or special.
-f'-ome 0/
Demurrer.
when
out.
The former
will
be
The
in substance.
objection
V.
N.
when
()
bill
v.
Willis, 3
r.
12.
and
bill,
see
a similar rule as
97, 98.
(A) Cochrane
the
is
latter is indispensable,
is
(g) Wright
teath, 2 Jur.,
N. R. 416.
defective
where the
in point of
Rumbold
v.
For-
252
DEMURRERS.
^^'^-
Dm^er
^Y
must be
down with
set
directness" (A).
demurrer to the
It would seem, too,' that a special
t
whole or part
of a bill would enable the defendant to
^
stated dis- / dcmur OTB teuus
to the whole or the part of the bUl
respectively,
/
on any other grounds (Z) and even on
f\
\
general
demurrer
\j
a
for want of equity, he might
\ demur ore tenus on a mere formal objection (/),
/ But if the defendant wishes to have more than
one ground of demurrer on the record, he must state
them distinctly as separate causes of demurrer ().
[ Otherwise, he must assign ore tenus the cause not so
stated, and may have to pay the costs of the demurrer on the record, even if he succeeds upon the
other demurrer; nor will he get the costs of such
latter demurrer (o).
If there are two causes of
demurrer assigned, and the defendant only succeeds
on one, the only consequence may be that no costs
ThesCT-erai
groanos of
demnrrer
should be
'
will
Want
of
equity.
(Jk)
Story,
Eq.
PI.
and not
455 ; Bart.
relates, it appears,
to questions of juris-
Suit, 107,
108
118.
(0 Rump
W. R.
V.
Matthews
v.
(m) Henderson
(b) Barber
v.
389.
(o)
(p)
Reeves, 11
528.
DEMUEHERS.
diction (r) or of parties
.
1.1
.1
wnicn must be raised
or of multifariousness
(),
253
(t),
made by
Fmme </
Demurrer,
tenus.
ofre
(m),
the
bill in
respect
or Statutes of Limita-
If,
demurrer.
And
some
and
but
pay
only,
costs,
may
bill, it
distinctly, as separate
grounds of
will
on
several
demurrer
to
tinctiy as
grounds.
And
if all
the
be
demurrer
in,
when such
for
objections
may
be taken at the bar. Besides setting out distinctly the causes of the
not be
left to
bill it is applied.
itself
(r) Barber
v.
Cooper
V.
()
(0 Rump
(u)
Wood
Bromley, 11
()
{to)
(x)
V.
Earl Fowls, 3
De
G.
&
Sm. 692.
V.
Midgeley, 5
W.
De
G.,
M.
&
G. 41
R. 713.
577.
Middlebrook
v.
Partofbiuto
appues to be
254
DEMURRERS.
part and
bad
in part (y).
It will
to
murrer
Nor
bill
demurrer be disallowed
merely because it does not cover so much of the bill
as by law it might (a) ; but still, a demurrer to the
discovery alone, which might have covered the relief
to which such discovery is merely ancillary, would
not be allowed now any more than it formerly
(0),
will the
Where
Grounds to be
clearly expressed.
is
applied
(c).
be clearly expressed.
parties
DiacoTery.
for
r.
Taylor, 4
v.
V.
Hicks
&
B. 121.
v.
(e)
V.
Corp. of Poole, 4
Rayner
v.
Raincock, 1 Cox, 41
Gen.
W.
R. 577.
Emmett v. Mitchell,
M.Co., 10 W. R. 245.
but see
demurrer to some of
which do not apply
bill,
v.
9 Jur. 170,
M. &
Cr. 32.
DEMUREEES.
255
be
may
fendant
to avail himself of
discovery
is
it
in that way,
at
least, if
the
of objection
to difIf there are different srrounds
J
o
ferent parts of the bill, they must be taken by
cover.
(/) Red. 185.
(g) Red. 185; Hodgkin t>. Longden, 8 Ves. 2
Ves. 273 Dell v. Hale, 2 Y. & C. C. C. 3, 4.
;
(A)
Red. 184.
Todd
v.
Gee, 17
separate
demurrers.
257
ADDENDUM.
(Pages 190-192.)
and on the case coming back into Court, if the parhas been proved before the chief clerk, a
general inquiry may then be directed as to wilful
defaults (a).
But if an inquiry is sought not inticular
way
as facts
advanced
may be
stated
(6),
(g), p. 191,
and Sleight
298.
(i) Sandon
(c)
i>.
Merriman
v,
title (c).
Lawson, 3 K,
&
J.
258
ADDENDUM.
But he will not be allowed the inquiry unless there
some proofs of his allegation {d), which need not,
however, it seems, be particular (e). The passage at
are
p. 192, as to the
must be
of the case
The
passage at the same page, as to a decree in a redemption suit being " in the usual form, directing an
is
The
authority quoted
Powell
v.
Trotter
must be
corrected.
(d) Enowles
(e) Ibid.
v.
v.
Hooper, supra.
APPENDIX.
BILLS.
It
is
may
r. 2,
that Bills
Injunction
mortgages,
In Chancery.
Plaintiff,
.1 r, j- j
Defendants.
.\
.
Bill or Complaint.
To
above-named
Plaintiff, as follows
1st of May, 1851, pay to the Plaintiff, his executors, administrators or assigns, the sum of 5,000, with interest thereon at
the rate of 5 per centum per annum, as by the said Indenture
will appear.
2. The whole of the said sum of 5,000, together with in- Debt stm
*"^terest thereon at the rate aforesaid, is now due to the Plaintiff.
260
Mortgagei.
Second
mortgage.
Applications
for payment.
APPENDIX.
The Defendant Henry Jones claims
quent to the
Plaintiff's said
mortgage.
Pretence oj
other ciiarges.
ticulars thereof.
Intended
waste.
^- There are divers valuable oak, elm and other timber, and
timber-like trees, growing and standing on the ferm and lands
comprised in the said Indenture of Mortgage of the Ist of
May, 1850, which trees and timber are a material part of the
Plaintiff's said security
and if the same or any of them were
felled and taken away, the said mortgaged premises would be
an insufficient security to the Plaintiff for the money due
thereon.
;
Prayer.
The
James
Styles and
261
BILLS.
able Court from felling, cutting or disposing
of any of the timber or timber-like trees
now standing or growing in or upon the
said farm and premises comprised in the
said Indenture of Mortgage, or any part
Mortgage-
thereof.
4.
That the
Plaintiff
may have
such further or
Henry
may
of Complaint are
Jones.
Y. Y. {name of Counsel.)
Note.
This Bill
above-named
Plaintiff.
II.
Bill hy Mortgagor against Mortgagee in Possession for Redemption of Mortgaged Freeholds, imth Charges as to Deterioration, Dilapidation, and vexaHovs Delays on the part of the
Mortgagee.
In Chanceey.
Lord Chancellor.
Vice-Chancellor
Between A.
Plaintiff,
and
CD
Defendant.
Bill or Complaint.
To
the Right Honorable Eichaed Baron WestBITEY, of Westbury, in the County of Wilts,
Britain,
Mortgage.
262
APPENDIX.
Mortgages.
payment.
Entry by
mortgagee.
Dilapidation.
Deterioration
by repeatedly
^ering
(or
Charges as to
damages.
6.
The
said Plaintiff
by reason of the
BILLS.
263
mortgaged premises ought to be ascertained and charged against the Defendant in taking his accounts
Mortgages.
mortgagee in possession.
The rents and profits of the said premises are and have Bents cxcecaalways been greatly more than sufficient to satisfy the interest ^ intereston the said mortgage debt, and the Plaintiff charges that the ^^'^ "''^^'saccounts of the rents and profits of the said premises ought to
be taken against the Defendant with yearly rests.
7.
8.
On
or about the
of
186, the
Plaintiff wrote
offer to pay,
f* demand
'""^
'"<"'"'=-
Correspond^<'-
By
sum
of
false
and incorrect.
of
The Plaintiff however, on the
caused a
reconveyance of the premises to be sent to Messrs.
who then were and now are the solicitors acting for the Defendant in the matter of the said mortgage, for their perusal
on behalf of the Defendant. The said draft was retained by
the said solicitors, and no objection thereto has been taken by
12.
draft
them
13.
Drait recon-
y sent
jected to.
or the Defendant.
The
264
Mortgaget.
APPENDIX.
but the Plaintiff refused to accept the said sum of
in
such satisfaction and discharge, or to execute the said reconwas more than sufficient to
veyance. The said sum of
satisfy and discharge the amount then due upon the security
aforesaid.
Charges of
vexatious
conduct.
As
to documents.
the Defendant.
Oflerto
redeem.
16.
The
Plaintiff offers to
Prayer.
The
3.
by
and
costs,
(if
to the Plaintiff.
4.
That
it
may be
Ck)nrt that,
directed
upon the
by
Honorable
paying to the
this
Plaintiff
265
BILLS.
Defendant the sum (if any) which shall be
found due to him for principal, interest and
costs as aforesaid after such deductions as
aforesaid, within such period as this Court
may appoint, at such time the Defendant
shall reconvey the said mortgaged premises
free and clear of and from all incumbrances
done by him or by any person claiming by,
from, through or under him, and deliver up
all deeds and writings in his or their custody or power relating thereto, upon oath,
to the PlaintifiF or as he shall direct.
5.
6.
That
all
rections
di-
7.
8.
That the
suit.
may have
III.
Priority.
Humbly complaining
title, <&c.,
[The
shew, &c., P. of
N.
Mortgages.
266
Mortgages.
Description of
pliLlntifis.
APPENDIX.
Humbly complaining
shew, &c. The
Company (Eegistered) [or (Limited)],
carrying on business at
."]
tered) [or (Limited)], Plaintiffs, &c.
3. On or about the
of
the Defendant A. applied
,
to the said
for a loan from the said banking company,
and it was agreed that the said banking company should
advance certain sums to the Defendant A. on haying the same
secured in manner hereinafter mentioned.
4. On or about the
of
the said company accordingly advanced to the Defendant A. the sum of
and
the said Defendant gave to the said
on behalf of the
said company, a bill of exchange dated the
of
and
drawn by
and accepted by the said Defendant A. for the
sum of
payable at three months after date, and at the
same time the said Defendant deposited with the said
as
such manager as aforesaid for and on behalf of the said company, the title deeds, evidences and writings relating to a
certain messuage and hereditaments hereinafter described, and
executed a memorandum as follows
,
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
,3rd of
,186
In consideration
Gentlemen,
by me
to
you
"A.
"
Registiy of
memorandum.
To
banking company,
."
BILLS.
267
Mortgages.
The Defendant
and
Default of
ieiit.
Pretence of
''""'
^'""J"*
^^^'
""^
interest.
Neglect of
second mort-
^Z^'^
10. The Plaintiffs hereby offer to deliver up the said bills ofexchange to such persons and upon such terms as the Court
may
direct.
Prayer.
The
Plaintiffs
pray as follows
That it maybe declared whether the Plaintiffs
are entitled under and by virtue of the said
memorandum and deposit to a charge upon
;
1.
n2
charge of
notice, actnai
?lve,'^yt'JS'
mortgagee.
268
APPENDIX.
and
the premises for the said sum of &
the said ftirther advances, or which of them,
in priority to the alleged mortgage of the
of
Defendant B. of the
Mortgaget.
2.
That an account may be taken upon the footing of the said declaration of what is due to
the Plaintiffs for principal, interest and costs
upon the security of the premises in priority
to the said mortgage of the Defendant B.,
and that the Defendant B. may be decreed
to pay the same to the Plaintiffs within a
short day, or in default the Defendant B.
may be foreclosed all right or equity of redemption in the premises, and may be ordered to assign his said security and convey
the premises to the Plaintiffs free from such
right or equity of redemption.
3.
4.
5.
That, &c.
269
BILLS.
IV.
seisin of
vendor.
2. On the said
of
the Plaintiff caused the said Sale by auchereditaments to be put up for sale by auction at
by *'""
Messrs.
auctioneers, subject to certain conditions of sale
then produced. The said conditions provided that the purchaser should pay into the hands of the auctioneer immediately
after the sale a deposit of
per cent, in part of his or her
purchase money, and sign an agreement for payment of the
residue thereof on the
of
then next at the office of
Mr.
the Plaintiff's solicitor, from which time the purchaser was to have possession of the said hereditaments, or to
be entitled to the rents and profits thereof, and up to that time
all outgoings were to be cleared by the Plaintiff, and that if
from any cause whatever the purchase should not be completed
on the said
of
then next, the purchaser should pay
interest after the rate of 5 per centum per annum on the said
residue of the said purchase money from that day until the
time of the completion of the purchase, and that an abstract
of the title of the Plaintiff to the said hereditaments should be
furnished to the pTirchaser at the Plaintiff's expense within
days from the date of the sale, and that all objections to
the said title which should not be sent to the Plaintiff by the
days from the delivery as aforesaid
said purchaser within
of such abstract, should be considered to be waived, and that
upon payment of the residue of the purchase money the purchaser should be entitled to conveyances and assignments of
the said hereditaments, such conveyances and assignments to
be prepared by and at the expense of the purchaser, and that
the conveyance, assignment or surrender of any outstanding
estate, term or interest of any description, should be at the
expense of the purchaser.
,
of
the Plaintiff's solicitor, at
4. On the
, Mr.
and
of
the Defendant's request, sent to Messrs.
who were and are the solicitors acting for the Defendant
in the matter of the said sale, a perfect abstract of the title
of the Plaintiff to the said hereditaments.
,
Delivery of abstract.
270
APPENDIX.
Specific
5. On or about the
the said abstract was
of
returned to the said Mr.
with some observations and
requisitions of title made by the said Messrs.
and on or
about the
again sent the
of
the said Mr.
said abstract to the said Messrs.
accompanied by a
answer on the part of the Plaintiff to the said observations
,
Perfontumcc.
Seqaisitions
and answers.
Ml
and
No further
requisitions.
No
objection, &c.
the
Possession by
defendimt.
7. On or about the
of
the Defendant was let into
possession of the premises and has ever since continued in the
possession and in the receipt of the rents and profits of the
said premises.
Demands
for
completion.
and neglect
to complete.
title
8.
On
of
the
Cliarge of
acceptance of
title.
chat^s
that the
objections to
the title of the Plaintiff to the jsaid hereditaments and premises,
and to be ordered specifically to perform the said agreement
10.
Plaintiff
all
suit.
Prayer.
The
Tbe
offer to
do equity.
2.
BILLS.
27]
3.
And
that,
&e.
V.
Bill by intended Lessee against Lessor for Specific Performance
of Agreememt to grant Lease, and Claim for Darrmges.
Between A.
Plaintiff,
and
CD
Defendant.
3.
The
Plaintiff, in
Alterations
272
Sfonfe
erronmam.
executed at
Applications
for lease.
Dae payment
of rent, &c.
Offer to per-
tormagree-
APPENDIX.
the building therein mentioned, according to the plan therein
referred to, and on the faith of having a lease granted to him
according to the said Agreement made various alterations and
improvements in the said premises, and all such alterations
and improvements were made with the knowledge and sanction of the Defendant; and in such buildings, alterations
and improvements, the Plaintiff has expended the sum of
226:15. 2d.
4. The Plaintiff has frequently applied to the Defendant to
grant him a lease according to the said Agreement, but he
refuses so to do.
5. The Plaintiff has always duly paid the rent and performed the covenants which, according to the said Agreement,
are to be paid, observed and performed on his part; and he is
.^ling and hereby offers specifically to perform the said
Agreement on his part.
Prayer.
The
1.'
That' the
Agreement
so
by and between
into
2.
Or
if this
fit,
the damages
by reason of the
non-performance of the said Agreement on
which the
Plaintiff has,
may be assessed in
such manner as this Honorable Court shall
direct, and that the Defendant may be decreed to pay such damages to the Plaintiff
in substitution for specifically performing
the said Agreement.
the Defendant's part,
3.
4.
That the
Plaintiff,
suit.
&c.
273
BILLS.
VI.
STiort Bill for Administration
Administra*""
trator.
On
the
of
2. On the
of
, 1858, letters of administration to the
personal estate of the said A. C. were granted by her Majesty's
Court of Probate to the Defendant who is now her sole legal
personal representative.
3. The said A. C. never was mai-ried, and had neither father
nor mother living at her decease. The Plaintiff is one of her
cousins-german by her mother's side the Defendant W. C. is
another of her cousins-german by her mother's side and the
Plaintiff and Defendant are two of her next of kin, and are by
virtue of the Statutes for the Distribution of the Personal
Estate of Intestates entitled to share in her personal estate.
Letters of
aaministi'a-
Titles o(
""*
^'if"''?
4. The next of kin of the said A. C. are numerous, and the Next of kin
majority of them in very humble circumstances. And it is a inown.
matter of considerable difficulty to ascertain with correctness
who are the persons entitled to her personal estate.
5.
A. C.
is
Prayer,
The
2.
That, &c.
VII.
Short Bill by Creditor against Executrix for Administration of
Heal and Personal Estate.
1. J. F., late
last
of
surgeon, duly
his wiii
of Tes-
of
Will [and Testament in writing], bearing date the
^^^f^^?
, 1854, whereby he directed that all his just debts, funeral
N 5
274
APPENDIX.
Administration.
Death of
testator, &c.
and testamentary expenses should be paid as soon as conveniently might be after his decease, and subject tliereto he
gave, devised and bequeathed all his estate and eflfects real
and personal of which he might at the time of his decease be
seised, possessed or entitled, or over which he might have
any testamentary power unto his wife M., her heirs, executors,
administrators and assigns absolutely, and the said Testator
appointed his said wife sole executrix of his said will.
2. The said Testator died on the ~-~
day of February,
185, without having altered or revoked his said Will, aijd
the said Will )as beep proved in her Majesty's Court of
Probate by the said M., [whereby she has been constituted and
become the sole legal personal representative of the said
Testator.]
Debt
to
Plaintiffother debts.
Personalty
insufficient to
pay debts.
Partly outstanding.
3. The said Testator was at the time of his dea;th justly and
truly indebted to Plaintiff in the sum of
upon simple
contract, and was also indebted to various persons besides
Plaintiff both on specialty and simple contract.
4. The said Testator was also at the time of his death possessed of or entitled to personal estate of considerable value,
but as the said M. alleges insufficient for the payment of his
debts in full.
5. The said Defendant has already possessed herself of, got
in Or received a considerable part of such pei'sonal estate and
other part thereof as she alleges now remains outstanding or
unreceived.
Kealty
unknown.
Prayer.
The
That the
real
may be
J. F.
J.F.
2.
That
for
sary directions
3.
That, &c.
275
BILLS.
VIII.
bankruptcy.
4. The said W. P. was at the time of his death possessed of Property
or entitled to personal property which had been constituted aciutrea since
^''^^I'toyprincipally (as Plaintiff believes) from savings made by him
out of his earnings subsequently to his having been adjudicated
a bankrupt, and Plaintiff has got in and received some part of
such personal property, and other part thereof still remains
outstanding.
5. The Defendants as assignees under the bankruptcy of claim thereto
the said W. P. claim to be interested in or entitled to the "' Defendants
'"*^'8"e^J*
personal propei-ty of or to which he was possessed or entitled
at the time of his death.
6. There are some creditors of the said W. P. who have
become such subsequently to the date of the said petition in
bankruptcy, and whose claims conflict as Plaintiff is advised
Creditors
since petition,
276
AdminUtra-
"""
Titie of
APPENDIX.
7. Plaintiff is sole next of kin of the said W. P. under the
Statutes for the Distribution of the Estate and Effects of Persons dying Intestate.
Flaintia as
nextolUn.
p^^^^^^
The
2.
That
3.
That
may be
intestate
5.
That, &c.
IX.
Sill hy an Infant Cestui que Trust for Administration of Real
amd Personal Estate directed to he sold, charging the Executor
and Trustee with Devastavit, and ashing for Appointment qf
a new
Trustee.
Friend)
and
CD
Humbly
Defendant.
BILLS.
spinster,
Ms
277
Plaintiff as follows
Adminiaira-
tionBreach
1. H. F., deceased, duly made [and signed] his last Will [and
Testament in writing] bearing date the
185
day of
and thereby, after directing that all his just debts, funeral and
testamentary expenses should be paid by his executors as soon
as convenient after his decease, gave, devised and bequeathed
unto his executors thereinafter appointed and the survivor of
them, and the executors and administrators of such survivoi',
all his estate and effects whatsoever and wheresoever both
real and personal upon trust, to coUect get in and receive such
parts as should consist of money or securities for money, and
to sell and dispose of the residue of his said estate and effects
(except his books, plate and jewellery, which he directed
should be preserved and given to his son the Plaintiff whenever his said executors should think fit), and to stand possessed
thereof and of the proceeds of such sale or sales upon trust to
invest the same in their or his names or name in some or one
of the public stocks or iimds of Great Britain or of the East
India Company, and out of the interest dividends and annual
produce thereof respectively to pay unto his father E. F. since
deceased one annuity or yearly sum of 80 for and during the
term of his natural life by equal quarterly payments, and
subject thereto upon trust to pay and apply the whole or such
,
'
S|S.'?'f^
278
APPENDIX.
Administra-
2.
185
ofTrmt,
Death
of tee-
tatoraod
probate.
or about the
month of December,
said
about the
June, 185, duly proved by the Defendant alone in the Prerogative Court of the Archbishop of Canterbury, [and the Defendant thereby became and has ever since been and still is
the sole legal personal representative of the said Testator.]
Acceptance of
trosta by defendant and
disclaimer
other tmstee.
Estate of
testator.
Assets in
Possession of
articles speciflcalJy bequeathed.
possession.
Misapplication of assets.
Particular
instances of
misapplication.
279
Bii-Ls.
9. The Defendant alleges that he has recently, and in consequence of the remonstrances of the said Mr. K., purchased
Refusal to
produce
^""^
estate the sum of
per Cent. Consolidated Bank Annuities. However, the
Defendant has not produced, and he refuses to produce the
stock receipt or any evidence showing such purchase.
"'*
Ml
accounts of the
10. The Defendant ought to set forth
estate of the said Testator and of the application thereof.
H. The Defendant
Prayer.
The
1.
That the
2.
and decree of
this
Honorable Court.
4.
6.
6.
That,&c.
Documents,
280
AdminigtraUatit Limited.
APPENDIX.
Between
S.
Y.
and
Plaintiff,
Clerk, and
|
wm of realty
and personalty (before
Wills Act).
^^,^fe_
1. J., late
of
BILLS.
281
Admtnisiratim. Limited.
the said
departed this life Death of tes2. In the month of
without having revoked or altered his said WiU, which was t^'"of
duly proved by the said J., the nephew,
on the
H., P. and P., in the Prerogative Court of the Archbishop of Probate by
duly proved by the ^<!ator8.
of
Canterbury, and was on the
said N. D. in the same Court.
3. All the trustees of the said Testator's Will accepted and Acceptance
executors.
acted in the trusts thereby in them respectively reposed as *y
aforesaid.
282
APPENDIX.
AdminUtraUon, Limited.
Conversion
of estates.
Appropriation
of funds for
residuary
bequest.
Title of
4. After the death of the said Testator the said N. B., H.,
F. and P. sold and converted into money the real and personal
estate of the said Testator, and out of the monies arising from
such sale and conversion appropriated and set apart and inor thereabouts, to
vested in their names a sum of
,
answer the trusts in the said Will contained as to the said
one-fourth part or share so bequeathed by the said Will in
trust for the said Thomas Mason for life, and his children as
aforesaid, of and in the said one-fifth part or share of the said
residuary real or personal estate of the Siud Testator.
5.
plaintifi.
On
the
of
S. Y., since deceased, but there was no settlement or agreement for a settlement either previous or subsequent to such
marriage which in any manner affected the share or interests
of the said E. L. under the said Will of the said Testator.
6. The said J. L. the father died in the year
, leaving
the said T. L. his son, E. Y., formerly E. L. spinster, and
M. L., his said three children, him surviving.
Payment
of
dividends to
tenant for
life.
of
leaving
8. The said E. Y. died on or about the
the said S. Y., deceased, her husband, and the Plaintiff her
only child, her surviving.
,
The
of
other resida-
ary legatee,
representative un-
known.
Deaths of coexecutors.
The
and
is
many
years
283
BILLS.
13. The said N. D. being at the date of his will and thence- Administraforth up to the time of his decease seised of or otherwise well iiortf Limited.
entitled to real estates of great value, and being at the time
Will of enrof his decease possessed of or entitled to large personal estates, Tiving exein such manner as by law was then required for rendering cutor and
valid devises of real estate, duly made and published his last trustee Cl>efore Wills
Will and Testament in writing, dated the
of
Act).
, 1820,
and thereby devised and bequeathed all his real and personal
estate unto his three sons, J. D., since deceased, and the
above-named Defendants E. D. and H. D., their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns respectively, upon trust to
sell and convert the same as therein mentioned, and directed
his said trustees to stand possessed of the monies to arise from
such sale and convei-sion upon certain trasts, including a trust
for payment of his debts therein mentioned ; and the said Appointment
of defendants
Testator by his said Will appointed his said three sons J. D., executors,
'
15. The said J. D. died in the year 1831, leaving the De- Death of one
fendants his co-trustees and co-executors him surviving.
^'^'^m*
16. The Plaintiff within the last twelve months, and by piaintw's
*
accident, discovered the fact of the said T. L., E. Y. and M. K.,
*f/te
and their deceased father having been interested under the '^"^
said Will of the said Testator, and he thereupon forthwith
upon the subject, who
consulted his solicitors Messieurs
of
commenced a correspondence with Messieurs
,
the solicitors of the Defendants, for the purpose of ascersaid
shares
of
the
said
taining what was the amount of the
T. L., E. Y. and M. K. in the said residuary estate of the
and whether the same had been paid over to them
said
or to their representatives, but no satisfactory information as
This corto the payment of such shares has been obtained.
to which the Plaintiff craves leave to refer, conrespondence,
^1
f aa
r
1 on
A
ana
lob
oi
tinned up to and mclusive ot the
in
been
engaged
have
Messieurs
said
the
that
time
since
making fiirther enquiries of other persons upon the subject
,
T'T*
284
APPENDIX.
Administra-
m.
ti
Limi ted,
Kcsidue appropriated
never been
paid.
Defendants
Mtelrfttif
last executor,
The
17.
gaid
"vyill
The
*f-
^-
sufficient to
personal estate.
The
'
1.
That the
3.
That
4.
That the
&c.
BILLS.
285
XI.
Bill hy Legatee against Executor and Trustee to set aside a
Deed of Gift to Defendant for Fraud and want of independent
Advice, for Administration, and Receiver, and to restrain Defendant from obtaining, dc. the Funds.
Between
J. C.
Administra-
tion Fraud
Camcetla-
tiono/Deed.
Plaintiff,
and
C.
G.
Defendant.
L., late
Wm
of
2.
The
made a
286
APPENDIX.
AdminUtra-
tion Fraud
Cancellation qf Iked,
5.
Defendant
administrator.
7.
Estate of
testator.
the
The
Assent to
bequest of
chattels.
to gift.
On
Title of
plain tiif.
Facts of
fraud, &c.
287
BILLS.
by the Defendant
said he thought he should employ a separate Administrabut the Defendant said that Mr. A. would do just as tioriFFraud
well for him the Plaintiff as for himself, and afterwards in the uon'^Be^.
course of the same day the Plaintiff and Defendant being at
the said Mr. A.'s office on the matter of the said administration,
the said Mr. A. handed the Plaintiff a paper telling him that it
was for the purpose of assigning the fiirniture to the Defendant, but tie Plaintiff declined to sign it. On their return
from the office of the said Mr. A. the Defendant was very
angry -with the Plaintiff and told him that he could give him a
great deal of trouble and keep him out of his property for
more than a year, and that after the trouble and anxiety the
Defendant had had to find the Plaintiff it was not right, and
that the furniture would not fetch much at a sale and was not
worth more than 40. T^wo days afterwards the Plaintiff
being in want of a small sum of money to procm-e mourning
applied to the Defendant to lend him the same, and on making
such application the Defendant again urged him to give up
the furniture to him the Defendant upon the grounds hereinsolicitor,
before stated, whereupon the Plaintiff, believing the Defendant's statement as to the value of the furniture, and his
statement of the great trouble and expense he had been put
to in finding the Plaintiff, and fearing that the Defendant
might annoy him by keeping him out of the money he was
entitled to, and being -wholly without the assistance of any
legal advice in the matter, consented to assign the fumitura
to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff immediately accompanied
the Defendant to the said Mr. A.'s oflSce to inform him of such
consent. The Defendant then told Mr. A. to prepare a deed,
making over the said fiirniture and other chattels to him the
Defendant, and that they, meaning himself and the Plaintiff,
would caU the next day to sign.. They accordingly went the
next day to the said Mr. A., who had accordingly prepared a
deed, and who read it over to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff
then signed it. The Plaintiff was wholly without legal advice Absence of
or protection in the matter, the said Mr. A. having acted taaepenacnt
therein entirely as the solicitor of the Defendant.
9.
The
Answer of
288
APPENDIX.
10. After the Plaintiff had left the said Mr. A.'s office and
executed the said Deed, he -was informed for the first time that
and the
tUmo/Deed. the Defendant had Only just returned fi-om America
Plaintiff began to suspect that the Defendant could not have
Diacoveiy ol been at much trouble and expense in finding him out, and that
"
the Defendant had not been acting straightforwardly with him
in the matter of the said assignment, and accordingly the
Plaintiff determined to consult, and did for the first time con.
sult, his solicitors Messrs.
A(3minUra-
'^Zk^
'
Charges, that
deed was
fraadalent,
That receiver
pokrtM.*"^'"'
Offer to do
equity.
11. The Plaintiff avers that under the circumstances aforesaid the Defendant cannot retain the said furniture and
chattels against him, and that the said assignment by the
Plaintiff to the Defendant of the said fiimiture and chattels
and the Deed which the Plaintiff has executed, purporting to
assign the same to the Defendant, are firaudulent and void,
and such Deed ought to be delivered up to be cancelled.
of
t'le
estate
ascertained.
Prayer.
The
Plaintiff prays as
1.
That
foUows
may be
ment by the
to the Plaintiff
2.
said Testator
come
to the
289
BILLS.
3.
That an account may be taken of the debts Administraand funeral expenses of the said Testator '^'^^<"
and the legacies respectively bequeathed um of Deed.
by his said Will and Codicil.
4.
6.
and
satisfied.
estate
7.
8.
That the
to
Plaintiff
may have
such further or
pay
suit.
may
290
APPENDIX.
XII.
Constructive
and actual
Fraud-
as
made
Discovery
CancellaMon
of Deed.
in
Between
Plaintiff,
and
R
\_Address'],
Marriage.
1.
On
Sarah
Treaty for
marriage afc
time of deed.
t>6ed vesting
property in
Defendant
and other
trustees
and
out of power
of
husband.
the
of
Gr.,
Defendant.
&c.
of
,
spinster,
of
an Indenture of that date,
3. On or about the
and made between the said S. of the one part and the Defendant and certain other parties to the Plaintiff unknown of
the other part, was executed by the said S.
By the said
Indenture the said bond and the said sum and interest thereby
secured were assigned by the said S. to the said parties thereto
of the other part, their executors, administrators and assigns,
upon certain ti'usts, whereby the Plaintiff was and is deprived
of the control and enjoyment of the said property, and amongst
others upon certain trusts for the separate use of the said S.,
but the Plaintiff is unable to discover or set forth the parti
Marriage
settlement.
Circumstances of
fraud in Defendant.
BILLS.
6. The said Indenture of the
of
does not purport
to be made, and was not executed with the privity or consent
of the Plaintiff ; and the said R., at the several times when the
said last-mentioned Indenture was so prepared and delivered
to him as aforesaid, well knew that the same was intended to
be executed and was executed without such privity and consent as last aforesaid.
291
Constructive
"^ actual
2)ixo!m
Cancellation
"fBeed.
7. The Defendant has ever since the date of the said Inden- Receipt of
ture claimed to be entitled to receive the interest upon the projerty'by
said bond debt, and has received all the said interest from the Defendant
said T. as and when the same became due and payable from
the said date to the
last, but has not accounted for
of
or paid the same interest to the Plaintiff.
8. The Defendant has invested at divers times and in divers and invest*'
securities the said interest so received by him, but the Plaintiff is unable to discover in whose name or names, or for
whose benefit the same has been invested, or the nature and
particulars of the said investments, and the Defendant refuses
to give the Plaintiff any information as to the said last-men-
tioned matters.
9. The Plaintiff charges that, under the circumstances, the charge of
said Indenture was executed in fraud of his marital rights and actual and
ought to be set aside, and that the Defendant E. fraudulently fraud,
colluded with the said S. to deprive the Plaintiff of his marital
rights, and ought to pay the costs of this suit.
Prayer.
The
2.
3.
4.
of
That the said Indenture of the
may be declared fraudulent and void, and
may be delivered up to be cancelled.
o 2
292
APPENDIX,
and that the Defendant may be ordered to
pay and transfer, or procure to be transferred to the Plaintiff, all the said sums of
money, investments, accumulations and interest.
5. Tliat
6.
7.
That, &e.
suit.
XIII.
Atcoimt
^^Zef%
MUcondud.
yy Married Woman against Trustee of Marriage Settlement and Will, for an Account, for Removal of Trustee, and
Appointment of New Trustee.
ji{ii
twenty-one years
age ofi
.
.J
Humbly complaining show unto his Lordship the abovenamed Plaintiff M. P., the wife of the above-named Defendant
John
P.,
of
by B. P. of
P., the
By
Sthcrirf'wue
to
pay sum to
be settled.
BILLS.
293
294
ACCOUTd
APPENDIX,
Trustee for
Misconduct.
Death of
lather, and
probate.
Payment by
executois of
sum
tees.
to trus-
M.
in
aforesaid,
where he was practising as a solicitor; and upon such payment the said P. M. and N. signed and delivered to the said
W. K. and John P., a receipt for the said sum of 495, as
follows
W. K.
295
BILLS.
" which, with Five pounds retained by them for legacy duty,
" makes the sum of Five hundred pounds, the amount of a
" legacy given to us by the "Will of the late Mr. K., in trust
" for Mrs. M. P. and her children.
" (Signed)
Account
JRemoval of
Trustee for
Misconduct.
" P. M.
" N." (a).
ligence of
poses.
Defendant.
Interest was paid on the said sum of 495 by the said Payment
P. M. to the said M. P. up to the 25th of March, 1848, at the "'*'='^^'rate of 4 10s. per cent, per annum, but since that time no
interest has been paid in respect of the said sum.
7.
oi
8.
insolvency
his circumstances
9. The said P. M. never returned to this country, and died and death
trustee.
abroad in the beginning of the year 1857.
oi
10. No rent has been paid by the said N. to the said M. P. Kent of lands
in respect of the said moiety of the said premises called S. ""paw since
"'
since the 15th of November, 1856 (except as hereinafter men- te?. "
tioned), when the rent which had become due on the previous
29th of September was paid by the said N. to the said M. P.
11. On the 4th of November, 1857, the sum of 10 was Claim by
received in respect of the rent, which had become due since Defendant for
repairs
the said ^9th of September, 1856 and the said N. alleges that
large sums have been expended in the repair of the said pi-emises, which have exhausted the balance of such rents. The
Plaintiff M. P. avers, that if such sums have been so expended
by the said N. or any other person by his order or authority,
which she does not admit, they were expended improperly and cliarged to be
and
contrary to the express directions of the said John P. given on improper
unauthorized.
behalf of her the said M. P. to Mr. H. M., the son of the said
aforesaid, and is the solicitor and
P. M., who resides at
agent of the said N. in the matter of the trusts of the said
Indentm-e of Settlement.
;
12.
and her
solicitors Messrs.
(a) This being a written admission, could then have been proved
without its being alleged, and certainly could now. Under all the
circumstances stated, lie trustee N. would not have been able to set
up a plea of .nonpayment to him with any chance of success in
proving it, and there seems to have been no use in stating this
receipt.
Applications
'"' '"'"nna-
296
APPENDIX.
Acamni*
Removal of
Trustee for
Msctmduet.
tion and accounts.
Particular
applications.
Fact to show
Defendant
knew of misappropriation.
Letters referred to as
further evidence.
said P. M. and N., and since the said P. M. went abroad to the
said N. for information as to whether and how the sum of 495
was invested, or for the payment of the interest on the said
sum of 495, and for the restitution and proper investment of
the capital thereof, and for proper accounts of the rents and
profits of the said moiety of the said premises called S., but
they have respectively refused to comply with such requests.
13. As evidence of such applications, the Plaintiff M. P.
avers that the said John P., in the year 1841, went with the
aforesaid,
said N. to the said P. M. at his said office at
and inquired of the said P. M. what had been done with the
said sum of 495, when the said P. M. refused to give the said
John P. any information on the subject and told him he had
no right to ask. Whereupon the said John P. left the office
and the said N. remained with the said P. M. Shortly afterwards the said N. found the said John P. in the street and told
him to the effect that the said P. M. had lent the money to
a friend of his, and that he the said John P. had no reason to
fear, as it would doubtless be all right.
14. As lurther evidence of such applications, the Plaintiffs
crave leave to refer to two letters dated respectively the 28th
of July and the 20th of August, 1851, written and sent by
Messrs.
late of
the then solicitors of the Plaintiff
Mary P., to the said N., and to two letters dated respectively
the 25th of September and 2nd of October, 1851, written and
to the said H. M., and to a letter
sent by the said Messrs.
dated the 9th of October, 1857, and written and sent by Mr.
of
the present solicitor of the said Plaintiffs, to the
,
said
Cliargesagto
liability of
N.
15.
to
who is a farmer now residing at
N.,
make good the said sum of 495, and interest thereon firom the
aforesaid, is
bound
Defendant,
accounts,
removal as
trustee.
Money under
settlement
duly invested.
25th of March, 1848, and to account for the rents of the said
moiety of the premises called S., and ought to be removed
from being a trustee of the said Indenture of Settlement and of
the said Will of the said K. K., so far as it relates to the beforementioned devise of the said moiety of the premises at S.
16. The 500 covenanted to be paid by the said R. K. by
the said Indenture of Settlement was duly paid by him to the
said P. M. and N., and has since been invested by them on the
security of a bond by John P., W. B. and W. H.
17. The Defendant N., or his solicitor or agent, has the
proper custody or power of the said Indenture of Settlement
BILLS.
297
and paper writings relating to the said several matters aforesaid, whereby the truth of such matters, if produced, will
Kemmaio/
appeal.
Misconduct.
Prayer.
The
Plaintiifs
pray as follows
1.
2.
4.
and
5.
That
all
o5
Account
298
APPENDIX.
for all other purposes
suit.
6.
7.
That, &c.
suit.
XIV.
Specific
^"ctZs^
Between
Sir
H.
P.,
Baronet
Plaintiff,
and
^'cWk
*^.'
^^^J'^'^^^-'^-
Defendants.
Settlement of
who
J. P., Baronet,
.
History and
settlement of
heir-looms.
299
BILLS.
" (after death of his
" tinue."
Specific
delivery of
Chattels.
its
executor, and
who proved
his
WUl.
The
Piamtift
tiieir
"presenta-
After the death of the said Sir J. P., his widow (herein- Offer by tesDowager Lady P. to distinguish her from Lady ^*J ^""
P. the wife of the Plaintiff) repeatedly offered to give up the looms.
diamonds in question to the Plaintiff, as she considered Lady
P. the Plaintiff's wife, the person entitled to the use of them.
The Plaintiff, however, from motives of delicacy was unwilling
to take them from his mother, but Lady P. did subsequently
receive the ear-rings which formed part of the set, and which
have ever since been and are now in her possession. The
Dowager Lady P. invariably and frequently spoke of the remaining diamonds as heir-looms which were to be delivered
when she died to Lady P., the Plaintiff's wife, as the natural
person to wear them.
8.
and took
after her death the said Defendants arrived at
The Defendant
possession of her personal property there.
C. S. also took possession of a tin box containing the diamonds
in question, and which as the Plaintiff believes was addressed
in the Dowager Lady P.'s writing to the present Lady P.
,
^^^^^^^
(executOTs*).
300
Specific
delivery 0/
Chattels.
Cause of
delay in de-
raandmg
heir-looms.
APPENDIX.
The Dowager Lady
them.
11. Recently however differences have arisen.
The result
has been that the Defendant C. S. has renounced probate of
the Dowager Lady P.'s Will, though he retains the diamonds
and the other Defendant has applied for probate of the Will,
which was granted to him on the
of
.
Application
for heir-
looms.
Special value
of heir-looms
to Plaintifl.
Under
13. The jewels left in the tin box (that is to say) the set
of diamonds not including the ear-rings, are of considerable
value but they have a special value to the Plaintiff in consequence of their having been in the family not only since
but for very many years before, and in fact no price in
money would be an equivalent for them to him.
;
Prayer.
The
in question
may be decreed
BILLS.
301
3.
4.
That
5.
[Further
part of them.
if necessary all proper directions may be
given for securing the diamonds pending
the decision of this suit.
relief.
'\
XV.
Bill by Executrix of deceased Partner to wind-up Partnership
and to surcharge and falsify Accounts.
W.
of
Partnership
u^Opm'ina
'
DeatJi and
aforesaid deceased died on the
1. T. W. late of
of
1853, having duly made and executed his last "Will, S"repre-'''
dated the 11th of
1832, whereby he appointed the Plaintiff sentation by
his sole executrix and general legatee, and the Plaintiff has p'"'"*since the death of the said Testator duly proved the same in
the proper Ecclesiastical Court, and is now his sole legal personal representative.
,
302
Partnership
mnding~
up -Opening
Accounts
APPENDIX.
exclusive right and liberty of using the same for all purposes
of trade under the conditions and restrictions of a certain act
of parliament made and passed in the
year of the reign
of his Majesty King
intituled " An Act," &c., together
with the lime-kilns and other buildings and wharf used for the
purpose of the trade there then lately carried on by the said
and the use of the towing, and free access to the same
paths and appurtenances to the said canal belonging, and also
the dwelling-house, garden and premises in which the said
Defendant M. P. then resided, and the fields or closes of land
then lately appropriated for the use of the said canal therein
particularly described, to hold the same premises with the
appurtenances unto the said Defendant M. P., the said T. W.
deceased, R. and S., their executors and administrators, from
the
of
1835, for the term of twenty-one years then
next ensuing, subject to tlie payment of the yearly rent of
and to the conditions and agreements therein contained
on the part of the said lessees to be observed and performed.
,
Ketirement
of other partners.
Business continued by
Defendant
and deceased
tiU 1846.
S. had so retired from the said partDefendant M. P. and the said T. W. continued to
carry on the said partnership business under the same style or
firm of the
canal company, without any written agreement, up to the end of the year 1846 or thereabouts. The
terms of their partnership were, that each partner should be
credited in the first place with interest on the respective
amounts of his capital in the concern, after which the clear
profits of the concern were to be divided between the partners
4.
nei'ship, the
in equal shares.
Partnerehip
deed in 1846.
303
BILLS.
of rights by
them.']
say,)
d.
1846.
31st.
To M.
P.
cr.
in capital ac-
" count
'
1847. Jan.
1st.
By
" to
0"
But such account was never settled between the Defendant but not
M. P. and the said T. W. deceased, and the said partnership settled.
business was carried on by the said T. W. deceased, and the Business
Defendant M. P. under the said partnership deed from the cai-riedon
1st of January, 1847, up to the death of the said T. W. de- ^'S^"',
ceased, on the 13th of June, 1853, without any account of the
said former partnership between them being ever settled between them, and the annual statements of accounts, which,
according to the provisions of the said partnership deed, ought
to have been made out and settled between the said partners,
were never made out or settled between them.
settled ac-
<:nts.
304Partnership
winding-
up
Opening
Accounts,
.Management
by Defendant.
Applications
for accounts.
Agreement as
to accounts.
APPENDIX.
7. The partnership business was conducted and managed by
the Defendant M. P., and the said T. W. deceased took no
active part therein, and in his lifetime he frequently applied to
the Defendant to render to him a proper account of the partnership dealings and transactions, but the Defendant, save as
aforesaid, neglected to comply with such applications.
8. Since the death of the said T. W. deceased, the Plaintiff,
as such executrix as aforesaid has applied to the Defendant
to come to a fair and just account with her of all the dealings
and transactions of the said trade or business carried on by
him in partnership with the said T. W. deceased, from the
time when they first commenced carrying on the said business
in partnership together, and several meetings took place between the Defendant M. P. and Mr. Thomas T., who had undertaken to investigate the partnership accounts on behalf of
the said T. W. deceased, and his estate, and at a meeting held
at the office of Mr. H., at
on the 5th of May, 1854,
,
the foUqwing Agreement in writing was signed by the said
Thomas T. and the Defendant M. P., that is to say :
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
Account
settled on
behalf of
Plalntffl
under a mistake.
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
BILLS.
carrying interest as against the said T.
305
W.
deceased, and to
1st of January, 1847,
partnership
mntiing-
"^^"S."'
contains
many
W.
deceased. Account
and omits various items for which the said partnership ought
to have had credit as against the Defendant M. P., and is in
other respects imperfect and inaccurate, and particularly the
commencement of the
said partnership between the Defendant M. P. and the said
T. W. deceased in the year 1836, the said M. P. has supplied
himself from the stock of the said partnership with coal for
the use of his dwelling-house and hot-houses, and also since
the month of November, 1843, for the banking house of the
firm of B. H. and Company, in which he became a partner,
and that in the last-mentioned account no credit whatever is
given to the partnership for the price or value of such coal,
which was of large amount, or for any part thereof.
inl-
v'^<'f<"'-
say,)
s.
1837
167 14
1846
599 18
d.
d.
123 19
1846
198 14 lOJ
1,812
3,652 16
6i
difference of 1,840
11. b^d. in favour of the
Defendant M. P. on the items of interest during the
Being a
said
s.
1837
Thomas
12.
The
Particulars
o* surcharges
306
APPENDIX.
also the difference hereinafter set forth in the items of
interest with which the said T. W. deceased is credited and
is
v}inding~
upOpmini
Accounts.
account signed by
T.
.
in
Thomas
1837
W.
d.
1837
16
1841
307 18
to say,)
.115 16 11
1841
is
Interest credited to T. W. in
account delivered by Defendant M. P. in December,
1846.
d.
s.
.
156 15
W.
.000
63
Interest debited to T.
Interest debited to T.
W.
1841
1841
8 17
15 15
1846
Interest credited
Interest debited
76
170
307 18
.170
1846
137
Interest credited
Interest debited
137 16
6 10
156 15 9
137 5 10
19
9 11
Chajfge of
Plaintifls'
equity.
307
BILLS.
and writings relating or referring to or connected with or containing some entl-ies relating or referring to or connected with
the matters aforesaid or some of them, and from which, if produced, the truth of the matters aforesaid would appear.
PaHnei'sMp
*?7
^akSs!^
Prayer.
The
2.
That the
Plaintiff
may have
such further or
may
require.
XVI.
Bill for an Injunction
to restrain the
right,
Between
Infringement of a Copy-
A., B.
and
Copyright
-Injunction
-Account.
Plaintiffs,
and
J.
Defendant.
Plaintiffs, as follows
1. The Plaintiffs formerly, and at the times of the publication of the work next hereinafter mentioned, carried on and
still carry on business in partnership together in Patei-noster
Eow aforesaid as booksellers and publishers under the style or
firm of " A., B. & C."
2.
In the year
Plaintiffs in
Description
"' Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs'
^'"*-
308
Copyright
i/tfringemerU
APPENDIX.
" Narrative of
in Japan,
by D."
Title to work.
D.,
Description
^f worfc.
accompanied by maps and numerous pictorial illussome of which illustrations are plates or lithographic
engravings, and others woodcuts. Such plates and woodcuts
were made from sketches taken on the spot by the said D., and
the same were made at considerable expense to the Plaintiffs.
Such illustrations were made exclusively for the said work of
D., and they form part of the said book as published and retravels is
trations,
gistered as aforesaid.
6. The said book is a very valuable one, and the same has
had a very considerable sale. The price thereof to the public
is
Description
of Defendant
and his publication.
Row
The Defendant
aforesaid as
a,
colourable
variations
pages consist almost exclusively of exlong, from the said work of D., connected
together by a few short observations, and also of illustrations
or woodcuts copied and taken from the said work of D., such
illustrations being 20 in number.
The said extracts amount
to 200 pages of the said work of D., and the said illustrations
are copies, with only slight and colourable variations, of certain of the plates and woodcuts contained in the said work
of D.
9.
The
tracts,
said
many of them
309
BILLS.
tained great
'""'-
damage thereby.
JJJ^^^'
"
contained.]
Prayer.
The
Plaintiffs
pray as follows
That an account
:
1.
may be
3.
4.
of, or causing to
be printed, published, sold or disposed of,
310
APPENDIX.
any other book, publication or work containing any portion of or extract from the
said book called " Narrative of Twelve
" Years' Residence and Travels in Japan,"
or any illustration, plate, woodcut, matter or
thing therein contained.
5.
6.
That
7.
That the
to
pay
suit.
inquiries made,
Plaintiffs,
&c.
XVII.
Trade Mart
^A^mMDamages.
Plaintiffs.
History of
business of
Plaintiffs.
1. In the year 1750, A. B., long since deceased, the grandfather of the Plaintiffs, commenced carrying on business as a
aforesaid, and continued
cutler and knife manufacturer at
to carry on the same business down to the period of his retirement from business some time in the year 1798, when he
relinquished the said business to and in favour of his son
B. B., since deceased (the father of the Plaintiffs), and ft-om
the time when the said A. B. relinquished the said business in
his favour as aforesaid, the said B. B. continued to caiTy on
the said business of a cutler and knife maker down to the time
of his death, on the 15th of August, 1839.
From the death of their said father B. B., the said Plainwith the assent of the executors duly appointed by and
empowered by the due probate of his Will, and on behalf of
the said executors as representing his personal estate, continued to carry on Jiis said business down to the 1st of January,
1840, on which last-mentioned day the Plaintiffs, with the full
assent of the said executors and under and by virtue of the
said Will, took to his said business on their own account, and
2.
tiffs,
BILLS.
311
own benefit, and the said Plaintiffs have ever since TradeMark
continued and still continue to carry on his said business as I'mnction
his sons and successors in co-partnership together, under the
s^^eT
for their
3. The
ment and
and Sons."
'
said business has been ever since its commencestill is carried on on the same premises at
aforesaid.
4. From a period long prior to the retirement of the said
A. B. in manner aforesaid, and from about the middle of the
last century, the said business of the manufacture of knives so
established by him on the Plaintiffs' said premises at
aforesaid, had become and has ever since continued to be a
highly-esteemed and flourishing concern, and the articles of
cutlery, and in particular the knives, so manufactured by the
said A. B. and his said successors in the said business on the
said premises, had long prior to and down to the time of the
retirement of the said A. B., obtained and have ever since
continued to enjoy a very high reputation in the cutlery ti-ade
in SheflSeld and throughout England as articles of a superior
make and quality.
Keputation
* A"-
5. In the year 1805, the said B. B., as the person then origin and
carrying on the said business, devised and adopted as a dis- "'= * t"'*''tinguishing mark to be stamped and affixed on knives and
other articles of cutlery, manufactured and sold by him, a
certain mark or stamp, consisting of the name " B. B.," composed of and arranged in the letters and form following (that is
to say), [here give the trade mark (o),] and the said mark or aescripstamp has ever since been commonly and generally used by him Hon
and the Plaintiffs, as the chief distinguishing mai-k or stamp
denoting the knives and other articles of cutlery manufactm*ed
aforesaid and has
by them on their said premises at
been and stiU is stamped, or cause to be stamped by him and
the Plaintiffs respectively, on articles of cutlery manufactured
and sold by the said firm, and in particular on the thick part
of the blades of the knives manufactured and sold by them;
and such last-mentioned mark or stamp is now and has been reputation.
for many years well known to all persons engaged in the cutlery
trade, and generally to all purchasers of cutlery, and in particular of knives, in Sheffield and elsewhere in Great Britain
and in America, and in the Australian colonies of the Crown
and elsewhere, as the peculiar and distinctive mark of articles
of cutlery, and in particular of knives, manufactured by the
Plaintiffs as the persons representing and canying on the
gaid business, established by the said A. B., and continued by
the said B. B. and Plaintiffs in manner aforesaid.
;
(a)
Or " in
particular
and well-defined
letters
and form."
312
APPENDIX.
Trade Mark-
Injunction
Acctmni
Bamaget.
Value,
Sale of Plaingoods.
tiffs'
6. The articles of cutlery, and in particular knives, manufactured by the PlaintiflFs or their said firm, and bearing their
said stamp or mark impressed thereon, are and for a long time
have been held in very high estimation, and by reason of their
superior quality and workmanship command and for a long
time have commanded a ready and extensive sale throughout
England and the said United Kingdom generally, and in
America and the Australian colonies of the Crown and elsewhere, and the Plaintiffs have for many years past yearly
derived large profits from the sale of such knives and other
articles of cutlery so manufactured by them and bearing such
last-mentioned stamp or mark, being the stamp or mark of
their said firm as aforesaid, which have been sold by them in
large quantities to merchants, factors and others for exportation to Australia, America and elsewhere, or for sale in England and other parts of the United Kingdom,
7. By reason of the great excellence of the Plaintifis' said
manufacture and the superior quality thereof, the only prize
medal awarded by the Commissioners of the Grreat Exhibition
in Hyde Park, London, in the year 1851, for the best specimen
of the manufacture of knives, was awarded to the Plaintiff's
in respect of knives manufactured by them and bearing their
said mark or stamp.
General
Knowledge
of infringe-
ment
only lately
as to Defendant,
Piracy of
trade-mark
by Defendant
on goods sold
or made by
him, and resemblance of
goods to
Plaintiffs',
8.
The
Plaintiff's
aware that
have
articles of
313
BILLS.
imitations
"Jj^^^g^g
^^^
ininry
to_
fJ^^'^^^J,
in
314
APPENDIX.
Applications
for redress,
&c.
Prayer.
The
Plaintiffs
pray as follows
1.
BILLS.
'
p2
315
316
APPENDIX.
to pay or account to the Plaintiflfs for the
whole amount of the profits so realized or
received by him as aforesaid, and that for
That the
That the
Plaintiffs,
&q.
XVIII.
Patent
Trade
Name
Accmmt
Cvm'pemaXwn.
Letters
patent.
to
and use
amd for
317'
BILLS.
2.
specification of the said invention, the subject of the
said letters patent, was duly made and enrolled within the
period prescribed for that purpose in and by the said letters
patent, and the said specification so made and enrolled has
since been amended by a disclaimer of part thereof, bearing
date the
day of April, 185 , and by another disclaimer of
other part thereof, bearing date the
day of July, 185
and which two several disclaimers were duly entered and filed
on the
of
pursuant to the statute in that behalf
,
made and provided.
J^'^~
_!^Sto
com^Sm.
-;
Speciflcatiou.
Disclaimer.
The
of
which invention
'
(a)
Now
Novelty ana
''*'ty'
Title of
Piaii'tiis-
318
APPENDIX.
PatentTrade Name
Acarnnt
CompenMtion.
Sale and
reputation.
2^0 one else
entitled.
August
Mcan-s of
copying.
aforesaid.
General
ctiarge of
infringement
and
concert.
9. The several Defendants hereto have, in concert and collusion together for their mutual benefit or advantage, without
any leave or licence from, and in fi-aud and wrong of Plaintiffs,
and to their great injury, been trafficking in the sale of
machines as being machines of Plaintiffs' manufacture, which,
to the knowledge of the Defendants, have not been manufactured by Plaintiffs or either of them or by any person by or
with the licence or authority of Plaintiffs or of either of them,
machines in the sale of which the said Deand the
fendants have been trafficking have, in fraud and wrong of
Plaintiffs and to their great injury, been made and constructed
either by the said Defendants themselves or under their direction, without any leave or licence of Plaintiffs according to
the said patent invention, and in close imitation of
machines which have heretofore been constructed by Plaintiff
319
BILLS.
J. T. B. according to the said patent invention, and have been
sold by him to the public, and the said defendants have not
only nnlawfiilly used Plaintiff J. T. B.'s trade name and style
in selling machines as being of his manufacture which have
not been manufactured by him, but they have also in the construction and sale of the machines which they have sold,
violated Plaintiffs' patent rights and privileges, and under the
circumstances herein appearing, Plaintiffs are now apprehensive that the said Defendants will severally proceed to a
repetition of acts similar to their wrongful acts hereby complained of, unless restrained from so doing by the order and
injunction of this Honorable Court as hereinafter prayed.
Paunt
fSuSm
Account
Cbi^yeMoHon.
use
of
Plaintiffs
'"^^'^"'-
Apprehended
J^^^'"
10. Plaintiffs charge that on the 25th day of August last past, Particaiar
inMngemenu
the Defendant C. D. exposed for sale at his said shop, at
aforesaid, a
machine bearing thereon an inscription in
metal letters of the trade, name or style of Plaintiff J. T. B.,
as if the same were made by him, the same being in fact made
in accordance with the said patent invention, or with colorable
deviations therefrom, or the substitution of mere mechanical
equivalents for the same or some parts thereof, though not by
Plaintiffs or by any person by their or either of their licence
machines, which
or authority, and in close imitation of
Plaintiff J. T. B. has manufactured according to the said patent
machine
invention and extensively sold ; and that the said
which the said Defendant had so exposed for sale at his shop,
on the said 25th day of August, was then and there represented by the said Defendant as being a machine of Plaintiffs'
manufacture, and the said machine was then and there actually
sold by him to one P. Q., as being a machine of Plaintiffs'
manufacture, for the price or sum of
.
11. Plaintiffs charge that the said Defendant has since the
said 25th day of August had in his possession and exposed for
machines, precisely similar to the machine so
sale other
320
APPENDIX.
PatentTrade Name
ParticuJar
part of
machine UBed
with Plain'tifFs
on
name
it.
Other Defendants
making
for
sale.
13. Plaintiffs charge that the cast-iron cam wheel and frame,
which have been used by Plaintiff J. T. B. in the construction
of
machines of his manufacture, and which cam wheel
bears on its surface in a circle of raised metal letters the inscription "J. T. B. and Co., Patentees," have in fact been
taken and used as the model from which the cam wheel and
frame of the machine which was sold at the shop of the said
C. D. as aforesaid was cast, and that several parts of the
mechanism and apparatus used in the machine so sold are so
identical with parts of the mechanism and apparatus used by
Plaintiff J. T. B. in
machines of his manufacture, that
they are not distinguishable from one another, and that in
point of feet some of the mechanism and apparatus of Plaintiff
J. T. B., made from patterns and dies belonging to him, has
been surreptitiously used in the mannfactiu-e of the machine
which was sold at the shop of the said C. D. as aforesaid.
14. Plaintiffe ftirther charge that the Defendants E. F. and
K. L. are now engaged in making and constructing, and intend
to sell under the trade name or style of Plaintiff J. T. B. and
Co., as being machines of the manufacture of Plaintiffs, or one
of them, and constructed in accordance with the said patent
invention, and in imitation of machines heretofore constructed
by
and
selling.
321
BILLS.
Patent
Trade Navie
Ivjunction
Account
Compensation.
16. Plaintiffs
Inferior
articles
and
consequent
damage.
some of them have had divers conversations and communications with each other and with various other persons relating
to the matters and things herein stated and charged, and in
which conversations and communications the said Defendants,
or some of them, have or has admitted, stated or referred to
the said matters and things as true, and have or has written,
sent and received various letters to and from each other and
various other persons relating to the said matters and things
in which they, or some or one of them, have or has admitted,
stated or referred to the same or some of them as true.]
sions.
18. Plaintiffs ixirther charge that the said Defendants have Documents.
in their, or some, or one of their possession, custody or power,
divers journals, day books, waste books, ledgers, cash books,
Pray&r.
The
Plaintiffs
pray as follows
That the Defendants C. D. and E. F. and
K. L., their agents, servants and workmen,
:
1.
p5
322
APPENDIX.
restrained by the order and injunction of this Honorable Court until the
hearing of this cause, and thenceforth perpetually by the decree of this Court from
selling or oflfering or exposing for sale, or
disposing of or parting with the custody of
any
machines bearing the trade name
or style of Plaintiff J. T. B., which have not
been manufactured by him, or as being
manufactured by Kaintiffs, or either of them,
may be
some parts
thereof,
3.
That the said Defendants may also be compelled to compensate Plaintife for the damages they have sustained by the wrong&l
may
be
an inadequate
compensation to
same ; and that such dabe
assessed
mages may
and ascertained
tmder the mrection and order of this Court.
Plaintiffs for the
4.
BILLS.
323
to the
B_aid patent invention, or with such deviations or substitutions as aforesaid, or which
are calculated and intended to be used as
aforesaid, or which have the trade name or
style thereon of the Plaintiff J. T. B., or in
all
the costs of
this suit.
6.
That
Jias
Plaintiffs,
hem
&c.
estahlnhed at
km
XIX.
Bill
a DweUing-House, and
Obstruction of Light to
to restrain
for Damaaes.
"
1. Plaintiffs are the owners in fee simple of a freehold
messuage or dwelling-house situate in
Square,
in
the county of Middlesex, and generally called or known by the
name of No. 3 in the same square.
infmciion
Light
Damages.
Title.
2. The Defendants are the owners or occupiers of or otherwise entitled to or interested in a messuage or dwelling-house
situate in
in the said county of Middlesex, generally
called or known as No. 13 in
.
,
324
APPENDIX.
Ii\iunction
Light
Damages.
Enjoyment
of ancient
lights.
Kew
ings
build-
by
Defendants.
to south
is
WaU higher
than before.
Obstruction
of light.
Former
height of
wall.
Kotice to
desist.
BILLS.
in giving directions for the raising or heightening of the said
waJl, was requested by Mr.
on behalf of Plaintiffs to desist from so doing, but the said Defendants notwithstanding
such request continued to raise and heighten the said wall, and
the said Defendant A. B. asserted to the said Mr.
that he
the said Defendant considered he was entitled so to do, whereupon the firm of Messrs.
Plaintiffs' solicitors, wrote
, as
and sent a letter to the said Defendant A. B. requesting him
to pull down and remove the addition which he had then made
to the said wall, but the said Defendants have not complied
with such request, and in an interview which Mr.
,
a
member of the said firm, had with the said Defendant A. B.
on the 19th of February instant, the said Defendant asserted
that he considered that he had a right to raise the said wall as
he thought proper.
9. The said wall as now raised and heightened by the said
Defendant is in an unfinished state and apparently constructed
with the view and intention of its being carried up stUl higher,
and to support a roof, and Plaintiffs have reason to apprehend
and do apprehend that the said Defendants, unless prevented
from so doing by the order and injunction of this Honorable
Court, will proceed stUl fiirther to raise or heighten the said
wall and construct a roof upon or against the same.
ftirther lessen
means of the
of.
Prayer.
The
Plaintiffs
pray as follows
That the Defendants A. B. and C. D., their
servants, agents and workmen, may be restrained by the order and injunction of this
Honorable Court from further raising or
heightening or placing any roof upon or
against the wall adjoining to and on the
south side of the Plaintiffs' boundary wall,
which divides the property of Plaintiffs from
the property of or occupied by the Defendants
:
1.
325
Imnction
i^M
""""f^
Refusals.
Apprehension
obstruction.
326
APPENDIX.
situate at the back or rear of Plaintifis' said
messuage or dwelling-hause, No. 3,
Square, in the county of Middlesex, and
from permitting or continuing the said wall
so adjoining to and on the south side of
PlaintiflFs' said boundary wall, to remain at
a greater height than one foot ten inches
above such boundary wall, or at any height
exceeding such height above such boundary
3.
Court.
costs of this
suit.
6.
That, &c.
XX
Interpleads
Bill of Interpleader
and Injunction
to
stay Action at
Between A. B
and
to'JtayA^.
C. D. and E. P.
Demise to
piaintifF.
By
Law.
Plaintiff,
Defendants.
327
BILLS,
2.
ment
the said messuage and premises were settled for the benefit particulars
said H. K. during his life, and after his death for the >"itaown.
benefit of the said C. D. and E. F. or one of them, of the particulars of which the Plaintiff is ignorant.
life,
of
tlie
The
3.
said
of
last.
'4. The yearly rents for the said messuage and premises were
^^?^"l'
duly paid by the Plaintiff to the said H. K., up to and in- ana death.
elusive of the rent which became due on the
of
last.
Demise.
6. The Defendant C. D. claims to be entitled under the said Claim ot
''' ^^ ^' "'
settlement or settlements to the yearly rent reserved by the
of
said Indenture of Demise, and on or about the
sent to the Plaintiff a notice in writing claiming to be entitled
as last aforesaid, and demanding that the said sum of
rent so now due as aforesaid, and aU future rent to become
due under the said Indenture of Demise should be paid to the
said Defendant C. D., and threatening to take legal proceed- and threat
ings against the Plaintiff for the recovery of the said sum of ' '
rent, if the same were not paid forthwith.
offer to do
equity.
^'
328
APPENDIX.
Prayer.
The
Court shall
2.
That the Defendants may be decreed to interplead and settle between themselves their
rights in respect of all rent now due and
henceforth to become due under the said
Indenture of Demise, the Plaintiff hereby
offering to pay the same as this Honorable
direct.
3.
That, &e.
XXI.
Supplemental Bill.
Supplemental
Between A. B. and
CD.
and
E. F. and
...
....
Plaintiffs,
Defendants.
1.
D., of
On
the
B., of
the above-named Plaintiffs, as follows
of
,
:
ori^al
BUI of Complaint
in this
Vefmdants.']
And
it
Bill
prayed
[settingforth the
Prayer
329
BILLS.
The
2.
motion
on the
suit so
Decree^.
,
186
3. The said suit was reheard on the
of
before his Lordship the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain,
on an appeal motion made on behalf of the said Defendant
E. F. against the said decree made by his Honor Vice-Chan186
cellor Wood, on the
of
so far as it declai'ed
that [^setting forth the part of the Decree appealed against].
And his Lordship on such rehearing did not think fit to make
any order on the said application, and did order that the said
Defendant E. F. should pay to the Plaintiffs their costs of the
said application.
,
Supplemental
^''"-
Decree.
Appeal.
[^Then follow inquiries and further proceedings under the De- Proceedings
decree.
cree under which {in the case before us) it appeared (among under
other things) that the other Defendants to this Bill were interested, and that a sale directed hy the Court could not he made
unless they were
the Decree.^
Supplemental
matter.
Prayer.
Plaintiffs
pray as follows
1. That Plaintiffs
:
of the
there[other
of the
of
of
186, the
186,
186
of
maybe carried
and the
into execution between the parties to this
suit as between the parties to the said original cause.
,
2,
&c. That
relief
against E. F.]
BILL OF REVIVOR.
Bill of Revivor states the original Bill and Decree and
proceedings under it, and the other facts sufficiently to show the
abatement and the title of the new parties, a/nd then .] " The
said suit having become abated in manner aforesaid, no pro-
[A
Bill of
Revivor.
330
APPENDIX.
Bill of
'"'"^
'
ceedings have been taken to revive the same." [Artd prayi :"]
" 1. That the said suit and proceedings which so became abated
as aforesaid may stand and be revived, and be in the same plight
and condition as the same were in at the time of the abatement thereof. 2. That the said decree made on the hearing
of the said cause may be prosecuted and carried into effect
between the parties to this suit in the like manner as between
the parties to the said original suit as revived. 3. That &c."
COMMENCEMENTS OP
BELLS.
[We haw
stated in the text that there should he in the commencement of the Bill a proper description of the Plaintiff, and
to do that there is no difficulty when the law is known.
Thus of
a body of persons having a common interest, each must he described and made a Plaintiff, unless they have been made a corporation, or have been entitled by any act ofparliament to sue by
a public officer or secretary, in which cases as a rule they must
sue by their corporate name or as prescribed by the act, though
in some other cases a few are allowed to sue on behalf of all.
And so a married woman cannot sue alone, but jointly with her
husband, unless she claims some interest adversely or apart from
him, when she must generally sue by her next friend, who must be
described.
One or two commencements, in addition to those
above given, may be useful^
Humbly
&c.
wife, the
B.,
and C. D. his
complaining, &c. A. B. of
above-named
wife, Plaintiffs,
and C. D. his
Plaintiffs.
The
Plaintiffs,
&c.
Humbly
BILLS.
331
Commmccments, ic. 0/
^"a^^mT^
'
Plaintiffi.
Humbly
,
Humbly complain-
ing, &c. A. B. of
assignees
C. D. of
, and
, creditors'
[or A. B. of
official assignee, if no creditors^ assignees have
been obtained or order of discharge has been obtained] of the
estate and effects of
a bankrupt.
and, &c.
Informing showeth, &c., Sir R. P., Knight, her Majesty's
Attorney-General, on behalf of C. D. of
a lunatic, at and
by the relation of A. B. of
.
at the'*
War-
London
and
"'^^ ^ Physicians
''^of^LSo^n
^,y,^^,_
332
APPENDIX.
Cmmemeit^mmxtims
ana
Biiit.
as follows
charter in the year 1519, being the tenth year of the reign of
King Henry the Eighth. By this charter, &c.
12. The Plaintiffs were incorporated by a charter of his
Majesty Bling James the First, who, by letters patent under
the great seal of Great Britain, bearing date the 6th of December, in the 15th year of his reign, and written in the Latin
tongue, did for himself, his heirs and successors, grant unto
William Besse and divers other persons, &c.
bridge.
Of bUiB not
originaL
Review."]
INTEREOGATOEIES.
Interrogatories.
Form
In Chancbet.
Between John Lee
Plaintiff,
and
Dffendants.
named Defendants
in
answer to the
Plaintiff's
Bill of Complaint.
1. Does not the Defendant Henry Jones claim to have some
charge upon the farm and premises comprised in the Indenture
INTERROGATORIES.
of
Mortgage of the
mentioned
2.
1st of
May, 1850,
333
What
date, nature
inurragatorief.
if
any, the
what
is
due
thereon ?
3. Are there, or is there, any other mortgages or mortgage,
charges or charge, incumbrances or incumbrance, in any and
what manner affecting the aforesaid premises, or any part
thereof?
4. Set forth the particulars of such mortgages or mortgage,
charges or charge, incumbi-ances or incumbrance the date,
natm-e and short effect of the security
what is now due
thereon ; and who is or are entitled thereto respectively and
when and by whom, and in what manner, every such mortgage, charge or incumbrance was created.
;
Styles
is
required to answer
all
these
interrogatories.
numbered
and
is
2.
T. Y. [name of cowisel.']
[It must not be supposed, however, that the above interrogatories would be all that would be required upon such a Bill.
They are only examples of the form in which the questions
may be put. Two great objects of equity procedure are to
enable the Plaintiff to obtain discovery on all the points material to his case, and to obtain answers which will save the
expense and trouble of proofs. It is, therefore, usual and
proper to interrogate as to all the statements in the Bill. The
old forms of the interrogatories are also generally adopted,
and examples of such forms are appended below from which
it will be seen that the greatest care is taken to question the
Defendant so minutely as to the particulars that he cannot
evade the statements of the BUI by a negative pregnant or
otherwise, without neglecting to answer some specific interrogatory. The examples below, which are founded on some of
;
Commcm Forms of
Interrogatories
Form
I.,
founded on Statements in
Bills.
334
APPENDIX.
'^'
roga
ut.
Was not the Defendant James Styles at the date of the Indenture in the 1st paragraph of the Plaintiff's Bill mentioned,
seised in fee simple of a farm called Blackacre, or some other
and what name, in the parish of A., in the county of B., or in
some other and what parish and county or how otherwise ?
Was not such Indenture as in the 1st paragraph of the
Plaintiff's Bill is mentioned of the date and made between the
parties, and of or to the purport or effect in the said Bill in
that behalf mentioned, or of some other and what date, and
made between some other and what parties, and of or to some
other and what purport or effect or how otherwise?]
2. Is it not the fact that the whole of the said sum of
5,000, together with interest thereon at the rate aforesaid, or
some and what part thereof, is now due to the Plaintiff or how
otherwise ?
[3, 4, 5.
and timberlike
trees, or
or
how
otherwise ?
money due
thereon
INTERROGATORIES.
7. Is not the Defendant James Styles in possession of the
said farm, and has he not marked and whether or not for
felling a large or some other and what quantity of the said
oak and elm trees and other timber, or some and what trees
and timber, and has he not and whether or not by handbills
Inteeeogatoey as to Documents.
[Discovery as to documents and their production can now be
obtained by summons (15 <& 16 Vict. c. 86, s. 18), but it may
still be sometimes useful to interrogate as to particular documents, or documents relating to particular matters, so as to have
the ansv>er thereto on the face of the pleadings^
Whether the said Defendants, or some or one and which of
them, or the agents or solicitors, agent or solicitor, of them or
some and which of them, have or hath not now or had not
lately and when last in their, his or her possession, custody or
power, divers or some and what deeds evidences and writings,
draft copies and abstracts of deeds evidences and wi-itings,
securities, accounts, books of accounts, receipts, vouchers,
letters, copies of letters, memorandums and paper writings,
belonging or relating to the
or some or what part
thereof, or the other matters and things hereinbefore stated
and charged, or some and which of them, or whereby if
the same were produced, or otherwise and how, the truth
of such several matters and things, or some and which of them,
would appear, and that the said Defendants may set forth a
proper list or schedule of every such deed, evidence, writing,
draft, copy or abstract of a deed, evidence or writing, and
security, account, books of account, receipt, voucher, letter or
copy of a letter, memorandum or paper writing as aforesaid,
distinguishing such of the same as are, from such as are not, in
the possession, custody or power of themselves or their agents
or solicitors, or any part thereof respectively, and may produce
and leave such as are in their possession, custody or power, in
the hands of the Clerk of Records and Writs of this Honorable
Court for the usual purposes, and may set forth what became
of such of them as are not now in their possession, custody or
power.
,
335
i^nter-
^"^'^torie s.
336
APPKNDIX.
INTERROGATORIES IN ADMINISTRATION SUITS.
Jnlerrogatories.
As
to
Personal Estate.
Ml,
Set forth a
As
And
to
Testator's
As
to
Set forth a full, true and particular account of all and singular the freehold, copyhold and leasehold estates of or to
which at the time of his death the said Testator was seised,
possessed or entitled, or over or in respect of which he had
any disposing power or beneficial interest, and where every
part thereof is situate, and the yeaiiy value and other particulars thereof, and in whose tenure or occupation the same
and eveiy part thereof now is and have or hath been since the
death of the Testator, and under what leases or agreements
for leases, and at what yearly or other rents or rent
and
;
337
INTERROGATORIES.
whether the said Defendants, or one and which of them, ai'e
not now and have not been during the whole or some and
what part of the time since the death of the said Testator, in
possession and in the receipt of the rents and profits of the
said estates, or some and what part thereof, or who by name
now are or is and for how long a time have or hath been in
possession, or in the receipt of the rents and profits thereof,
and of every part thereof, and by what right or title. And a
like account of all and every the sum or sums of money which
have or has been and when received by the Defendants, or one
and which of them, or for their or any of their use for or in
respect of the rents and profits of the said estates, or any part
thereof, since the death of the said Testator, and by and from
whom and for what rent and for what part of the said estate, and
when the same became due and payable And set forth how
'and in what manner the same sums and eveiy of them have or
hath been applied or disposed of, and what is the balance in
the hands of the Defendants or one and which of them And
set forth a, like account of such of the said estates as have
been sold or disposed of, and when and by and to whom, and
for what sum or sums of money, and when and from whom all
and every or any such sum or sums of money hath or have
been received or come to the hands of the said Defendants, or
by any person or persons by their or any and which of their
order, or for their or either and which of their use and whether
any and which of the said estates of the Testator remain unsold
and undisposed of, and why, and what is the value thereof
:
respectively.
[These interrogatories might probably be much reduced.
If an eicecutor in a suit by a legatee or creditor should admit
assets sufficient to meet the demand of the Plaintiff, there
would be no need for a general administration, and therefore
If he should not do
for ahy discovery as to the particulars.
so, or if the suit were by a residuary legatee, &c., the object
of the discovery seems to be to obtain means for more searching
inquiries and more pointed amendments, rather than to procure accounts which can be had and tested under the decree.
(See Whitwoi-th, Eq. Plead. 26, 27, and the observations there
as to the advantages of inquiring for the documents and
books, &c. by which the accounts are made out. And see the
short forms of interrogatory there given.) ]
made
interrogatories.
338
APPENDIX.
DEMURKEKS.
2)emwTerA.
The Demun-er of
plaint of the
Commence-
menU
abore-named
BUI of Cora-
Plaintiff.
demurrer showeth
Want cf Equity.
That the
Where
there is
Bill, or
For
Multifariousneas.
{Or, That it appears by the said BiU that the same is exhibited against this Defendant, and A., B. and C. the other
Defendants thereto, for several and distinct matters and causes,
in many whereof, as appears by the said Bill, this Defendant
is in no way interested or concerned, and that the said Bill is
midtifarious.]
Of Statute of Frauds.
appears by the Plaintiff's said Bill that no
agreement in writing for the purchase of the said hereditaments, or any part thereof, nor any memorandum or note
thereof in writing, has been made or signed by this Defendant
or by any other person thereunto lawfully authorized by this
Defendant, and this Defendant claims the benefit of the statute
passed in the twenty-ninth year of King Charles the Second
for the prevention of frands and pequries.]
[Or, That
it
Where Suit
[Or, That the said Plaintiff by his said Bill seeks only to
recover a part of an entire debt thereby stated to be due to
him by this Defendant, and in respect of other parts of the
DEMURRERS.
339
said debt has, as appears by his said Bill, filed two other
several BUls of Complaint in this Honorable Court against
Demarrers.
this Defendant.]
necessary Affidavit.
conclusion.
Subject- Matter.
That the
shown that
upon
subject the
Defendant
to
Pains ihid
Penalties or Forfeiture.
That the said Bill seeks to discover how, &c. but this Defendant is advised that any discovery of the manner in which,
&c. would or might subject this Defendant to fine or corporal
punishment and also to a forfeitm-e of
;
q2
340
Demurrers,
APPENDIX.
performed by or under the decree of this Conrt,
or to have any such relief as is so prayed or sought by the
parts of the Bill hereby demurred to and for further cause
of demurrer to the same parts of the said Bill, show that the
company in the said Bill mentioned is a necessary party
to the said Bill, but the said Plaintiffs have not made such
company party to the said Bill..
specifically
rested in the matters and things to which the said Bill relates.]
And
Commencements.
PLEAS.
The Plea of
Commencemept.
To
the Jurisdiction.
PLEAS.
341
pims.
Of
Coverture of Plaintiff.
The
said Plaintiff
her said BUI, was and
now
Plaintiff.
amd Answer
in Support.
That, He has not, nor ever had, nor pretended to have, nor
does he, nor did he ever claim any right, title or interest whatsoever in the personal estate of the said Testator, all which
matters and things this Defendant doth aver and plead in bar
and this Defendant, not waiving his said plea
to the said Bill
but relying thereon, and for better supporting the same, for
answer to the said Bill, saith I deny that I now am or ever
was interested in, or now do or ever did claim to be interested in, the personal estate of the said Testator or any part
thereof
;
conclusion,
342
^'^^-
APPENDIX.
of
agreed with the said A. B. for the purchase of the inheritance in fee simple of and in the said hereditaments free
from incumbrances, and thereupon by an Indenture dated the
of
, and made between the said A. B. of the one part
and this Defendant of the other part, the said hereditaments,
in consideration of the sum of
paid by this Defendant
to the said A, B., were granted and assured by the said A. B.
unto and to the use of this Defendant, his heirs and assigns
and in the said Indenture was contained a covenant by the
said A. B. with this Defendant that the said hereditaments
should be enjoyed by this Defendant free and clear and freely
and clearly discharged of and from all incumbrances committed or permitted by the said A. B. or any person or persons
claiming by, from, through, under or in trust for him and this
Defendant doth aver t^t the said consideration money of
was actually paid by this Defendant to the said A. B.
at the time the said Indenture was executed, and that at or
before the respective times of the payment of the said considoration money and of the execution of the said Indenture,
he this Defendant had no notice of the said Agreement now
claimed by the Plaintiff, that [denying parUcular facts charged
as circwmstanees of constructive notice], all which matters, &e.
and I this Defendant not waiving, &c. for answer to the said
bill say as follows
I deny that I had at any time before or
at the time of the said purchase any notice whatsoever, either
actual or constructive, of the Plaintiff's said Agreement, or
that the same was charged upon or in anywise affected the said
hereditaments, and I deny [the facts charged as circumstances
of notice'] and I deny that I have ever admitted to the said
, in the
said Bill named, or to any one else, that I had
before or at the time of the said purchase any such notice as
afoTesaidi [then follow any facts (not r^erred to in Bill) in
suhsidium of plea].
;
&
That A.
343
PLEAS.
of the same hereditaments, and hath ever since continued in
such possession and receipt until the filing of the Plaintiff's
said Bill ; and this Defendant avers that the said A. B. and
this Defendant, from the said
of
to the filing of the
said BUI, have not, nor has either of them, given to the said
C. D. or the Plaintiff, or any person claiming the estate
(if any) of the said C. D. or the Plaintiff in the said hereditaments, or to any person being or claiming to be their or any
of their agent or agents, any acknowledgment in writing signed
by the said A. B. or this Defendant of the title, or of any
right of redemption of the ssiid C. D. or the Plaintiff, or of any
and
general terms
other allegations in the Bill inserted to take the case out of the
statute], and this Defendant claims the benefit of tlie Statutes
for the Limitation of Actions and Suits, and pleads the several
matters aforesaid in bar, &c. and I this Defendant in answer,
&c. [denying the acknowledgments in writing and other allegations as in plea, aiad asay particular charges, such as that of a
this
receiptfor interest so
Plea of a Release
made as to
be <m achwioledgment in
to
toriting.']
in Support
to so
much
is
Pleas.
344
APPENDIX.
tioned, and prays the judgment of this Court whether he ought
to be compelled to make any further or other answer to so much
of the said Bill as is hereby pleaded to. And this Defendant
not waiving his said plea but insisting thereon, for answer to
the residue of the said Bill, and in support of his said plea
saith as follows
I deny that the said release was unduly
obtained by me from the Plaintiff, or that the Plaintiff was
ignorant of the nature and effect of such release, or that the
consideration paid by me to induce the Plaintiff to execute the
said release was at all inadequate to the just claims and demands of the Plaintiff against this Defendant in respect of the
several dealings and transactions in the said BUI mentioned or
any of them and I deny, &c. [amsvier to residue of Bill,^
:
Plea
As
to
part of the said Bill as seeks a disanother Decovery from this Defendant of the title of
fendant in the said Bill named to the said hereditaments in the
paragraph of the said Bill mentioned, this Defendant doth
plead thereto, and for plea saith that he this Defendant is, and
for several years past has been, an attorney at law and solicitor
of this Honorable Court, and during such time has been and is
now employed by the
as such attorney and solicitor as
aforesaid, and in that capacity only, or by means of such employment, hath had the inspection and perusal of any of the
title deeds, of and belonging to the said estate or any part or
parts thereof for the use and service of his said client, and
therefore ought not to be compelled to discover the same.
to so
Plea
to
The Plea of
This Defendant, to
all
by the
said Bill,
and
see
Answers
(post).']
ANSWERS.
345
ANSWERS.
Form, of Answer given in Schedule
Answer
to
In Chancery.
Plaintiff,
and
James Styles and Henry Jones
The Answer
of
Defendants
named
Defendants.
James
Plaintiff.
Bill I,
James
M. N.
'[Naame of Counsel.^
Direct Admission.
q5
APPENDIX,
>'iO
Ansam.
S.,
and
before the filing of the- Bill in this suit, the Plaintiff in the
course of conversation as to the dowager's affairs said to me,
" The diamonds are mine, but the other trinkets must be sold
to pay the debts." Save as aforesaid I deny that it is the fact
that the Plaintiff gave me fall or any notice of his claim to the
diamonds in question, and whether he gave any such notice to
the said
S. H. I do not know and am unable to set forth.
Partial Ignoramce.
I do not
how
otherwise.
General Traverse.
Save as aforesaid I deny all and every {or do not admit all
or any of] the several matters and things in the Plaintiff's
Bill alleged and set forth.
I,
A.
B.,
to the
Plaintiff
say as follows
ANSWERS.
Answer of cm
The Answer of
347
Infant.
Anmers.
one years, by
Bill of Complaint of the above-named
In answer to the said Bill I
as follows
by
Plaintiff.
my
guardian, say
OTyectixm as
to
Parties.
my
remembrance or
belief whether
Cf Igrmrance hy Corporation.
know and cannot set forth whether
We
&e., and we
have made inquiries touching and concerning all and every
the said mattei-s and things of our [clerk] and all other our
officers and servants.
do not
On
Priority.
of
a settlement was executed on
my marriage with my present wife, and the said
was
employed by me as my solicitor to prepare and did prepare
the said settlement. The negotiations for the said settlement
were conducted by the said
on my behalf, and in the
course of such negotiations it was proposed by the said
on my behalf that the said memorandum of deposit and the
monies thereby secured should be included in the said settlement, but it was ultimately arranged between the said
acting as the solicitors for and on behalf
and Messrs.
of my said intended wife, that some other funds should be substituted in the place of the said memorandum, arid the monies
thereby secured, and the same memorandum and monies were
accordingly not included in the said settlement, and as evidence
of
thereof I crave leave to refer to a letter dated the
or about the
348
Anmers.
APPENDIX.
to the
,
and sent on or about that date by the said
and
said Messrs.
of
,
the
, and to a letter dated
to the
sent on or about that date by the said Messrs.
said
the memorandum of deposit in the
, and I say that
said letters referred to is the memorandum of deposit hereinbefore mentioned.
The said
was afterwards employed
by the Plaintiff as his solicitor to prepare and did prepare the
Indenture of Mortgage of the
of
in the Plaintiff's
Bill mentioned, and under the circumstances I submit that the
Plaintiff ought to be deemed to have obtained the said mortto the Dega,ge and to have advanced the said sum of
with notice of the said memorandum of deposit
fendant
and the security thereby made to me, and I claim priority in
respect of the said last-mentioned secmity over the Plaintiff's
said mortgage.
,
Answer as
to
to
Claim of a Partnership.
I have now in my possession or power various books, letters,
papers and writings relating to the matters in the Bill mentioned or some of them and I have in the schedule hereto,
which I pray may be taken as part of this my Answer, set
forth a list or schedule of all the said books, letters, papers
and writings but I deny that thereby or otherwise, if the
same were produced, the truth of the matters in the said Bill
mentioned or any of them would appear further or otherwise
than as the same is hereinbefore admitted, and, in particular,
that I have or ever had in my possession, custody or power, or
in the possession, custody or power of any agent or agents,
any book or books belonging to the said alleged co-partnership
and I say that all the said books, letters, papers and writings
relate exclusively to my title and to my own business solely,
in which the Plaintiff had no interest, and do not relate to the
alleged partnership nor to any business carried on by me in conjunction with the Plaintiff, and there are not any entries made in
the said books on the joint account of the Plaintiff and myself,
or on the Plaintiff's sole account, nor are any of the payments,
;
ANSWERS.
receipts, accounts, matters or things contained in the said
books, letters, papers or writings, or any of them respectively,
nor do the same appear to be had, made or done in the joint
names of the Plaintiff and myself, but, on the contrary, all such
payments, receipts, accounts, matters and things appear thereby
to be made, had and done in the sole name and on the sole
account of this Defendant, and I submit that I ought not to be
required to produce any of the said books, letters, papers or
writings or any part thereof.
349
Answers.
INDEX
TO
THE TREATISE.
ACCEPTANCE OF TITLE,
when
ACCOUNTS,
case for, nrast show sufficient facts, 7578.
general charge of intricacy not enough, 75, 192.
facts may be charged generally as they are within
knowledge of defendant, 7678, 130.
charge of conclusion of law will not authorize, 192, 193.
to open, specific errors in to be stated, 134, 193.
ACQUIESCENCE,
facts to negatire, necessary, 189.
a conclusion of law, 20.
when
ADMISSIONS,
90, 91.
must be of facts
See CONFESSIONS
Paetioulaeitt.
ADULTEKT,
may be made, 125.
" misbehayed herself," uncertain charge
general charge of,
AD VEESE
of, 81.
64, 128.
218.
AGREEMENT,
how
stated, 57.
5860.
documents
substance
not be men-
352
INDEX TO TREATISE.
ALLEGATA ET PROBATA,
decree according to, only, 196200.
relief on facts disclosed in evidence or answer only, 197.
facts disclosed by evidence of plaintiff may make ground for
no
tence, 199.
amended bill,
199, 200.
Answer^Facts.
ALLEGATIONS,
See
ALTERNATIVE.;Ske Relief,
171177.
AMBIGUITY,
immaterial where same relief in any case, 79.
fatal only in part, 79
112.
will be read most strongly against pleader, 79.
when
AMBIGUOTTS STATEMENTS,
distinct issues ought to be raised on each alternative, 79.
read against pleader, 79.
fatal, where no relief on one alternative, 79.
aliter,
where same
relief or part of it
on
AMENDED
BILL,
when
when
how
iow
237340.
INDEX TO TREATISE.
353
ANSWER,
where no, and none required, bill traversed, 214.
traverses what it does not admit expressly, 214, sed qu. note (J),
as a defence, must state defendant's case like the bill does
plaintiff's case, 216.
when statement
where document
in defendant's
hands, improper, 226.
must plead
go to
gist
354
INDEX TO TREATISE.
ANSW'E'Brcontinued.
to
amended
AEGUMENTATIVE PLEADINGS,
8486.
and plea, 217, n., 222.
how differ from implied statements, 84.
mle against follows from statute, 86.
must be substantially observed, Qj/., 85.
cannot be remedied by prayer, 86.
bad in
bill,
in answer
ASSIGNMENT
facta, 192.
BANKKUPTCT,
under old law, facts of, to be
under new law, aliter, 48, n.
stated, 47.
(g"),
50.
BILL,
9.
245,246.
INDEX TO TREATISE.
355
BEEACH OF TRUST,
question of law requiring facts, 24.
CHARGE,
different sorts of, 201.
anticipatory or replicatoiy, object of, 201
207.
will not entitle to relief unless an equity founded
expressly, 212.
on them
210212.
CLAIM,*
defendant's, is a matter of fact, 70, 210.
how
COLOUR,
may be
stated, 193.
CONCLUSION OF LAW,
what
is,
13, 14.
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT,
of, to be averred, 65, 188.
general averment sufficient, 66.
negative averment, 67.
which go to the gist of the case, to be stated when, 146.
performance
when
356
INDEX TO TREATISE.
CONFESSIONS
oral,
AND ADMISSIONS,
must be put in
issue, 146.
so as to give opportunity of meeting it, 147.
written, need not be stated, 147.
but, if not, will hare less weight, 147.
if stated in answer, plaintiff may give evidence to show their
real effect, 148.
of conclusions of law, written or parol must be put in issue, 148.
supposed instances of, examined, 149, n.
Qy. whether above strictness as to, would be followed under new
practice, 149, 150.
not observed in new American practice, 150, n.
CONVEYANCE, how to be
COPYEIGHT, infringement
may be
134.
COSTS,
facts to affect,
be read to
letters to
DECREE,
materials for, presented by pleadings, 9.
plea of former, how stated, 228.
according to allegata et probata of bill and answer, 9, 10,
196200.
DEFENCES,
different
may be
set
up by answer,
217.
DEFENDANT,
his title, when to be shown, 70, 71, 210.
his claim, when only need be stated, 70, 117.
when acts vexing plaintiff to be stated, 70, 210.
pretence of, how met, 70.
his case, alleged by plaintiff without strictness, 92, 213.
surprise. Court will not allow him to be taken by, 10, 118, 120.
DEMUEREE,
only raises inferences of law and not of fact, 20, 113.
admits facts well pleaded, 51.
on, bill read more strictly against pleader, 112.
nature of, 247
defects of form, must be raised by, 248.
not raised by, plaintiff can rectify, 248.
for, not favoured, 248.
when may be waived, 248.
of,
251-255.
INDEX TO TREATISE.
357
D'EMXTRKERcontinued.
general, sufficient for defects of substance, 251.
special, necessary for defects of form, 251.
unless general demurrer for want of equity, 252.
or special demurrer for other grounds, 252.
but costs may not be given unless grounds of demurrer
specified, 252.
grotrnds of, advantages of assigning, 252.
to be stated distinctly and separately, 253.
and clearly expressed, 254.
for want of equity, what is, 252, 253.
part of bill to which applied, to be defined, 253.
not disallowed now, because does not cover enough, 264.
to discovery only, when bad, 254.
to too much, bad, 253, 254.
but not overruled where answer acoidentally refers to part
covered, 254.
to relief, bars incidental discovery also, 255.
but defendant may give discovery iu aid of legal right, 255.
separate, to separate parts of bill, where grounds different, 255.
DISCLAIMER,
must be made by plea or answer
if
way
plaintiff requires,
127, n.
DISCOVERT,
bill of,
to
...
which
it is applicable, 17,
18, 103.
must
17, 18.
known
uncertain, 106.
where material to relief, special allegation unnecessary, 211, 213.
to save expense of proof, facts may be stated ia order to obtain,
194.
answer as a, how framed, 224, 226. See Answer.
right to, ground of indulgence in stating facts in defendant's
knowledge, 95 98.
title must be alleged in defendant
what
for, 213.
DOCUMENTS,
answer, how referred to in, 225, 226.
bUls, charge as to in,
must be stated fully and fairly, 160 152.
effect of only need be stated, and not words, 151.
may be given veriatim, 61, 89, 90, 161.
358
INDEX TO TREATISE.
DOCUMENTS continued.
bills,
charge as to in
oontinued.
or at hearing, 154.
will entitle plaintiff to the means of putting
in issue, 155.
shorter reference will suffice, 155.
if
tme
contents
DEINKCNG,
addicted to, and liable to be imposed upon, general charge of,
may be supported by particular instances, 124.
"DULY,"
adjudged a bankrupt, 48, n. (^).
became a shareholder, 54.
made a wiU,
proved
62.
will, 63.
EQUITIES,
relied on, to
See Kemep.
in answer, 216, 218.
EQtriTT,
of case, arises out of all the circumstances, 15.
out of exact words of instrument, 90.
court will look to whole bill, 91.
plaintiff 's, must appear in bill, 186.
offer to do, must be made, 189.
omission of, how remedied, 189.
EVIDENCE,
need not be stated in biH, 119
122.
in answer, 218, 219.
as, effect of stating fects, 136 146. ;&
EACTS,
Paeticulaeity.
answer, 23.
plea, 24, 47, 54.
INDEX TO TREATISE.
FACTS,
359
oontirmed.
acquiescence, 20.
trust,'existence of, 21
24.
breach of trust, 24.
notice, constructive, 24.
direct, aliter, 25.
title,
2633.
reason and limits of rule, 27.
pedigree to be substantially set out, 28.
to sue defendant only required, 29.
of mortgagee, 29.
of mortgagor, 30.
pretended
will, 30.
360
INDEX TO TKEATISE.
FACTS
what must be
stated in
equity, plaintifE's,
must be
bill,
186
200.
must appear,
186.
how
title, plaintiff's,
wrong done
by
220, 221.
to be stated by pretence and charge to contrary. See PkeTBlfCB.
vagueness in case from insufficient, 72 78.
well pleaded admitted by demurrer, 51, 247.
not stated in answer or bill, cannot be used by defendant, 216,
217, 219.
raised by pretence, put in issue by answer, 219.
112.
vrithiu knowledge of defendant, less certainty, 92
See
how
Vagueness.
to
be stated with
sufficient
particulars, 118
156.
Pabticularitt.
FAIRLY,
facts to be stated,
FEOFFMENT,
150152.
FOEM,
Court of Equity for sake of, ought not to do injustice, 246.
defects of, how to be raised, 248.
See Demurbee.
See
INDEX TO TREATISE.
361
FRAUD,
when matter of iiitention is a fact as well as conclusion
34-39.
by misrepresentation, is a question of law, Si, 35.
general charge of, needs an answer, 3539.
of law,
when
125.
82.
relief
also,
178
180.
FRAUDS, STATUTE
OF,
,-
Will.
must be pleaded specially, 230, 231.
unless no answer required and put
in,
case to be stated,
231.
TICULAEITT.
matters which go
to,
to be specially pleaded,
230-232.
GRAJNT
of incorporeal hereditaments,
IMPLIED BY LAW,
INCONSISTENCY
how
stated, 61.
INCONSISTENT
fass.See Relief;
See Relief.
Vagueness; Facts.
relief.
INDEFINITENESS,
in case for relief, fatal, 88, 89.
" or some of " defendants, collusion by, 88.
liable, 89.
L.
362
INDEX TO TREATISE.
stated
more
gist, 146.
INDUIyGENCE
INEANT,
where,
INFERENCES
is
INEORMATION,
statement as to plaintiff's, insufficient, IIS.
in answer or plea, when sufBcient, 217 n., 222, 229,n.().
INJUNCTION,
be made, 192.
INQUrRIES,
when
ground
INSANITY,
question of fact, 113.
be alleged in general terms, 124.
defendant's knowledge of is a matter of scientific opinion, and
facts should be given, 113.
weak and feeble understanding, almost approaching to idioiy,
not certain allegation of, 81.
may
INSOLVENT,
defendant had died, allegation that, allowed, 125.
INSUEEICIENT,
facts,
vagueness from,
pleaded according
may
e. g.
Answeb.
227. See
INDEX TO TREATISE.
JTJEISDICTION,
LACHES,
facts to show,
must be stated,
363
188.
LEGAL EIGHTS,
how
to be stated,
107112.
LESSOR.&e Facts.
LETTERS,
to prove facts of fraud need not be stated, 125.
agreement, unless to avoid plea, 125, 244, 243.
may be stated " as evidence," 138, 142.
when to be used on a question of costs, to be referred to, 244,
245.
LBHTATIONS, STATUTE
OF,
NOTICE,
general denial of, sufficient in plea, 67.
direct, matter of fact, 25.
constructive, question of law requiring facts, 24.
OUTSTANDING TERMS,
existence of,
when nature
PARTIALITT,
how
110.
PARTICULAR EXPRESSIONS,
" encouragement," 84.
" led him to believe," for fraud, when, 82.
"many years ago," when, 81.
" misbehaved herself," in case of adultery, 81.
" on or about," when, 87, 88.
" or otherwise," 89.
"or some of them," 80, 88, 89, 91.
" ought" to satisfy bond, 82.
e2
364
INDEX TO TREATISE.
PAHTICULAE
^XP'R'ESSJOJiiScontinued.
PARTICULARITY,
facts to be stated with sufficient, 118156.
reason and import of rule, 118 122.
title
want
may
American
fairly and
facts or documents, not necessary to case,
150.
INDEX TO TREATISE.
365
PARTICmOARITYPowe(?.
and fully, facte to lie st&teicontimted.
false colour by suppression or misrepresentation not to
given, 150.
fairly
be
PARTIES,
should be described with their addresses, 186.
defendants, out of jurisdiction should be stated, 186.
general rules as to, 19i 196.
133, 134.
PLACE,
when material to be named,
when a decree in rem, 87.
87.
See Inteeeogatokees.
PLAnSTTIFF'S CASE,
how stated,
93-112.
PLEA,
more precise than other pleadings, 123, 228.
of adverse possession, 54, 123.
of another suit, 123, 228.
of Statute of Frauds, 125, 230232.
of Statute of Limitations, 230232, 244.
purchaae for value without notice, 231, 232.
no notice, 67.
and answer, must
it
can cover,
by answer,
must state facts, not mere conclusions of law, 24, 47, 54, 229.
must traverse substantially inconsistent matter, 228.
must contain averments negativing facts charged to support a
229.'
specifically
meet
366
INDEX TO TBEATISE.
PLEA
continued.
specifically
229.
raised
by answer, no
bill
costs, 230.
to, to
be
answer to original
bill
may be
bill,
242.
read to counter-
plead, 242.
Limitations, Statute of, matter to take case out of, ought to be
stated in original biU to avoid plea, 244.
no notice, of, may be in general terms, 67.
answer and demurrer to different parts of bUl must state parts
to be covered by plea and demurrer, 255.
PLEADINGS,
more technical and precise than pleadings in equity, 3
taken most strongly against pleader, 21, 79.
in equity, ancient, 3 6.
modem, 6 11.
at law
5.
object of,
9.
certain, 6, 8, 27
29, 62,
64, 107, 108, 110.
201
special, explained,
205.
objects of, attained by amendments of bill, 203, 204.
use of "pretence" instead of amendment, 205207.
AjSTD direct,
averments of fact must be, 115
117.
PEATER
iSfee
PEECISION,
PEETENCE,
Relibp.
INDEX TO TREATISE.
367
PRETENCE-cof (((?.
of a mere claim puts fact of claim in issue, 70, 210.
sufficient to obtain discoreiy from defendant, 213.
of defendant's title, when facts to be stated or acts asserting
it,
PEOLrSITY,
on costs, 156.
to be avoided in original
effact of,
bill,
242.
PUECHASE,
for value without notice to be specially pleaded, 231, 232.
EECEIVEE,
"
EEFER,
be made, 192,
EEGrTLATIONS
imposed by
not be averred, 57
statute,
compliance with,
156.
when need
61.
EELIEE,
to, bars incidental discovery also, 255.
indefiniteness in case for, allowed, 88, 89.
points and, on which plaintiflE relies must be clearly indicated,
demurrer
what
167185.
reasons of the rule, 157, 158, 162, 164, 166.
prayer for further relief, under, 158 170.
rule in earlier cases, 159 13.
relief inconsistent with prayer must have been distinctly pointed to, 159162.
relief additional to prayer, only facts entitling to, need
modem cases,
163 170.
clearly referred to in bill or prayer, 163.
relief inconsistent with prayer must be clearly and
165.
separately pointed at, 163
relief additional to prayer must be clearly pointed at
by charges or prayer, 165 168.
rule in
relief
must be
if
arrange-
368
INDEX TO TREATISE.
"KEUEFoimtinued.
altematire, may be asked by bill, 171.
alternative inconsistent, whether it can be asked by biU, 172
177.
cannot be asked in inconsistent characters, 177.
according to cases of original or amended bill, 240.
178180.
may be
how
it differs
facts, 183.
may
bill,
184, 185.
SCIENTIFIC OPINION',
defendant's allegation of, insufficient, 113.
defendant " knew testator was sane," 113.
facts
known
90,
TIME,
when
TITHES,
title to,
how
stated, 32.
TITLE,
is
33.
INDEX TO TREATISE.
369
TTIl.^contiMied.
reference to instrument must be made, 33.
substance must be given unless instrument accessible to
defendant, 133.
through succession of wills, how stated, 133.
defendant's, may be stated very generally, TO, 92, 210, 213.
only necessary to show defendant claims, 70, 210.
unless to make him disclaim and pay costs, 70, 210.
when acts done in assertion of, or vexing plaintiff, 70, 210.
how
DEPENDANT PRETENCE.
;
187189.
vagueness in statement of, from
plaintiff's,
stated,
TRAVERSE,
where no answer and none required, it is a, 214.
answer is a, of what does not expressly admit, query, 214,
n. (J).
TRUST,
facts showing,
must be
21
stated,
24.
124.
fraud,
7274,
77, 78.
75.
breach of trust, 75.
accounts, 75
78.
title, 74,
inmnaterial where
same
on each alternative,
any case, 79.
79.
relief in
liable, 89.
89,
370
TNDEX TO TREATISE.
VAGUENESScomimMe*?.
conclusion of law, from statement of, 72.
technical terms, need not, but wiay, be used, 89, 90.
words of instrument may be used, 90.
admissions, to cure, allegations of, 90, 91.
must be of facts, 90.
of law, insufficient, 90.
91.
case, 93
112.
112.
tndefiniteness allowed, 95
98.
reason, thereof, should appear, 98.
must be clear there is some and what sort of equity,
plaintiff's
some
98-103.
convenient certainty only required, 102.
gu. whether greater strictness when in aid of legal
rights,
103112.
how made
how
stated, 63.
statement
formerly, 62.
now, 6163.
probate,
title
through succession
of,
how
stated, 133.
INDEX TO FORMS.
ACCEPTANCE OE TRUSTS, 278, 281.
ACCOtTNTS,
stated, 303.
surcharge
of, 305.
ACTION AT LAW,
threat to commence, 327.
injunction against, 326.
ADMINISTRATION,
bUls for,
by
administrator, 275.
creditor, 273.
See Lettbes.
letters of.
ADMISSIONS,
charge
of,
direct,
by answer, 345.
AEEIDAVIT,
279, 321.
want of demurrer
AGREEMENT,
for lease, 271.
performance
of,
by
plaintiff, 272.
ALTERNATIVE RELIEF,
ANSWER,
of, 345349.
and disclaimer, 346.
forms
265, 272.
372
INDEX TO FORMS.
APPLICATION,
for accormtB from mortgagee, 263.
accounts of partnership, 304.
delivery of chattels, 300.
information, 295, 296.
redress in other cases, 314, 324.
331.
BELIEF or remembrance,
answer as
to,
347.
BILLS,
bin for foreclosm-e of mortgage of freeholds injunction to restrain waste by mortgagor, 259.
bill by mortgagor against mortgagee in possession for redemption of mortgaged freeholds, with charges as to deterioration,
dilapidation and Texatious delays on the part of the mortgagee, 261.
bill
265.
273.
short bill
limited, administration of
to
payment of
legacy, 280.
INDEX TO FORMS.
BILLS
373
continued,.
CANCELLATION Or DEED,
285, 290.
CLAIM,
assertion of, 327.
CODICIL
341.
COMPAJinr, commencement
COPTRIGHT,
damages by piracy, 308.
injunction against piracy, account of profits by piracy and
damages, 307.
piracy described, 307.
COEPORATION,
ans\ver by, alleging ignorance, 347.
commencement of bill by, 330.
COERESPONDENCE, summary
COVERTURE OP
CREDITOR,
statement
PLAESTTIPP,
on behalf of
374
INDEX TO FORMS.
DAMAGES,
claims for, 262, 308, 313, 816. .
in place of specific perf onnance, 272.
DEATH
of intestate, 273, 275.
of testator, 274, 278.
without revocation of codicil, 285.
DEED
DELAY,
cause of, 300, 312.
vexatious, by mortgagee, 264.
DELIVERT UP OF CHATTELS,
DEMURRER,
specific, 298.
DETERIORATION', by
262.
DISCLAIMER,
and answer, 346.
by plea, 341.
statement of, 278.
DISCOVERT,
answer refusing, where, relating to defendant's title, 348.
case for, 290.
demurrer to, where, would subject defendant to pains and penalties or forfeiture, 339.
plea to, where matter privileged, 344.
DOCUMENTS,
charges as to, 264, 279, 296, 307, 314, 321.
relating to defendant's title, objection to produce,
348.
EQUITY, want
of,
demurrer
for, 338.
FRAUD,
charges of, actual and eonstmctive, 288, 291.
discovery of, 288.
marital rights, on, 290.
misreprescLtaiion by, 286.
statute of, answer claiming benefit of, 348.
demurrer raising, 338.
by answer,
INDEX TO FORMS.
HUSBAND AND
"WEFE, commencement
375
IGNORANCE,
_
by corporation
alleging, 347.
INDEPENDENT ADVICE,
absence
of, 287.
INEANT,
answer by, 347.
commencement of
INEORMATION,
applications for, 295.
particular instances of, 296.
at relation of some on behalf of other parishioners, 332.
on behalf of Crown, &c., 332.
on behalf of lunatic having no committee, 331.
INJinsrCTION
against obstruction of light, 323.
actions at law, 326.
infringement of copyright, 307.
of patent, 316.
parting with chattels, 298.
use of trade mark, 310.
name, 316.
waste, 260.
INQUIRY,
as to damages, 262, 308, 313, 316.
deterioration and dilapidation, 264.
title, charge to obviate, 270.
INSOLVENT,
assignee of,
INTEREST, want
commencement of
by, 331.
INTERPLEADER,
INTERROGATORIES,
as to documents, 335.
forms of, 332337.
JURISDICTION,
bill
LETTERS, summary
statement
of,
263, 283.
LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION,
before Probate Act, 275, 282, 286.
since Probate Act, 273, 275.
376
INDEX TO FORMS.
LIGHT,
enjoyment of ancient, 324.
injunction to restrain obstruction of, 323.
MARRIAGE,
MORTGAGE,
equitable, statement of, 266.
foreclosure of, 259, 265.
by bill, 265.
by answer, 397.
redemption of, 261.
statements of, 259, 261.
priority, claim of
MORTGAGEE,
dilapidation and deterioration by, 262, 263.
entry into possession by, 262.
equitable, answer of, claiming priority, 347.
MULTIFARIOUSNESS,
demurrer
MULTIPLICITY OF SUITS,
for, 338.
objection
by demurrer, 338.
NOTICE,
charge
of, actual
denial of, 267.
and
constructive, 267.
OBSTRUCTION OF LIGHT,
description of, 324.
injunction against and damages for, 323.
OFFER,
to redeem, 264.
to perform agreement, 272.
to do equity, 288.
PARTIES,
want
of,
demurrer
for, 339.
objection for,
PARTNERSHIP,
by answer, 347.
301.
accounts stated, 303.
winding up, 303.
to,
339.
INDEX TO FORMS.
377
PATENT
(LETTERS), 316.
established at law, 323.
infringement of, injunction against, account of profits by, and
damages, 316.
infringements of, description of, 318, 319.
PEKFORMANCE
of stipulations of agreement,
cific.
PLEA,
342.
PRETENCE,
of a charge claimed by a defendant, 260.
of other charges upon a mortgaged estate, 260.
second legal mortgage, 267.
PRIORITY,
answer of equitable mortgagee claiming, 347.
claim of, by mortgagee in bill, 267.
PRIVILEGED MATTER,
PRIVITY between plaintiff
of,
demurrer
338.
PROBATE,
before Probate Act, 278, 281, 283, 294.
rmder Probate Act, 274.
266.
REJIEilBRANCE OR BELIEF,
RESTS (YEARLY),
answer as
to, 347.
-nith,
262, 263.
282.
269.
SETTLED ACCOUNT,
304.
SPECIFIC,
delivery
up of
chattels, 298.
lease, 271.
for sale, 269.
STATED ACCOUNT,
L.
303.
for,
378
INDEX TO FORMS.
STATUTE OF FEAITDS,
answer claiming benefit
demurrer raising, 338.
of, 348.
TENDER
of mortgage
263.
TITLE,
as next of kin, 273, 276.
charge of acceptance of, 270.
of Tendor in suit for specific performance, 269.
of lessor in suit for specific performance, 271.
to heir-looms, 298.
access of light, 324.
copyright, 308.
trade mark, 310.
patent invention, 317.
in bill to restrain obstruction of light, 323.
mider wills and administrations, 282.
TRADE MARK,
injunction against use of, damages by infnngement of, and
account of profits, 310^-314.
piracy of, described, 312.
TRUST,
acceptance of, 278, 281, 283.
breach of, 278, 279, 292.
refusal of, 278.
TRUSTEE, removal
of,
296.
WIFE,
suing by next friend, commencement of bill by, 292, 330.
suing with husband, commencement of bill by, 330.
WILL,
(before Wills Act), 280, 283, 293.
(since Wills Act), 273, 277, 285.
London
printed by C.
CATALOGUE
Hab orits
PUBLISHED BY
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH,
Hato
iSoofesellers anti
^uilisSers
**Now for the Laws of England {if I shall speaJe my opinion of them without
"partiality either to my profession or country), for the matter and nature of
themj I hold them wise, just and moderate laws : they give to God, they give to
*' Cataar, they give to the subject what appertaineth.
It is true they tire as mixt
" as our language, compounded of British, Saxon, Danish, Norman customs.
" And surely as our language is thereby so much the richer, so ourtaws are like*'
wise by that mixture the more complete." Xoss Bacok.
**
LONDON:
7,
FLEET STREET,
1877.
E.G.
Q-
INDEX TO CATALOGUE.
Blockade.
Law of.
Pulling
55
...
Actions at Law.
Browne
57
58
Boundaries. Hunt
Brokers.
Admiralty,
...
29
Advowsons.
59
Cutler
...
&
Scott
...
Articled Clerk.
Mosely
Chancery Claims.
Average.
Crump
...
Awards.
Kedman
...
IS
Banking.
Grant
Keyser
...
18
55
Bankruptcy. Kobson
Manual.
Davis
Index.
Lewis
...
St
Bund
...
Trower
Examination Journal 52
Shaw
...
Smith
Pearce
Barbados.
Laws
of
..
53
41
56
56
...
Heales
...
Conveyancing,
Lewis 21
Ball
iPractice.
...
42
42
...
Law.
& Jencken
34
12
Collieries.
52
31!
Smith
Tudor
Forms. Barry
37
26
Christie
36
2S
28
Kelly
fl
Shelford
2S
32
...
Crabb
59
Tomkins
53
Barry
Kouse
Convictions,
Synopsis
of.
Forms.
Oke
Oke
...
...
47
4S
22
Co-operation.
Brabrook
Law.
Barbados
42
56
Copyholds,
Commentaries.
Stephen'sBlackstone's 7
Phillimore's ...
... 23
jEnfranckisemen i.
Kouse
Law
of.
Scriven
...
45
38
...
56
CommonForm Practice.
Coote
15
Common Law,
Law&Equiiy. Chute 13
Dixon ... 55
Hamel
55
Lush
Kerr
Bills of Exchange,
Grant '
18
Companies.
Grant
...
Shelford
Hunt
Coroner.
Baker
Corporations in General.
Grant
44
55
58
Costs, Lata
44
County Courts.
17
14
Compensation,
Law of. Ingram
Blackstone.
Stephen's
Fry
Contributories. Collier 46
Practice.
Belligerents.
Bills of Sale.
57
Introduction.
Hale
Colonial
Bar.
Kalendar.
12
21
46
10
Linklater... 57
41
Deane
Specific Performance.
38
Bainbridge
BuUey
In County Courts.
Moseley
Contracts,
Charitable Trusts.
Tudor
Civil
...
"25
Fulton
41
Contraband of War.
27
58
Drewry
Drafting.
Pews,
...
25
Constitutional Bpstorj-.
Church Building.
Foreign, Brandon
...
56
24
Attachment,
54
55
Practice.
29
27
May
...
Com.Zaw. Parkinson 58
Goldsmith
Hunter
Arbitrations. Redman 18
17
Conspiracy,
Law of. Wright
Constitution.
Stephen
Carriers,
Inland. Powell ... 34
Baitway. Shelford 17
16
Appeals.House of Lords.
Denison
44
Chancery Practice.
Agricultural Holdings.
Bund
...
Gaches
Chamber
Mirehouse
Aliens.
Keyser
...
Burgesses Manual.
15
Consolidation Acts.
Shelford
'57
Coote
57
Coombs. 43
Williams
Practice.
...
Bookkeeping,
Kerr
Chadwick
'
Deane
Solieitori'.
Administration Bonds.
Page
Page
Page
Accounts,
Shelford
...
38
17
of.
Gray... 65
Davis ... 10
FradiceinEguity^Bank^
ruptcy, &c. Davis 10
Practice in Admiraltv.
29
Coote
Pracbiee.
INDEX TO CATALOGUE.
Page
39
Oke... 48
^oge
Bar
Field
...
59
Hamel
Tudor
Fearne
so
Fences. Hunt
...
58
Final Examination
22
...
53
40
Draftsman (The).
Kelly
31
Fisheries.
Bund
Oke
Hunt
49
20
Shelford
Accounts.
Judicature.
...
45
...
60
...
44
'Williams v.Nicholsou 57
Bedford'
20
35
Rogers
Trower
10
Webb
35
.Magisterial.
Oke... 48
...
54
Greening 57
Chadwick 1
Probate.
On Form
of the
Burder v. Heath... 59
Gorham Case ... 59
liOiigt). Cape Town 59
Martin v. Mackonochie
Phillimore
59
... 59
Hebberti?. PuTclias 59
Election, Lam.
Davis 35
England,
Zaws of. Blackstone
Fraucillon
'
...
Stephen
English. Bar.
54
35
Labour Laws.
Land
Hunt
Game Laws.
...
Oke
...
14
49
...
33
12
...
58
'
13
Guarantees. DeColyar
Highways. Glen
Davis
Settlements.
Shelford
Law Dictionary
Law Student's Mag.
Law Studies. Mosely...
...
60
Smith
Bouse of Lords,
...
50
27
41
Leading Cases,
& Scott...
Dcnison
7
57
Digest.
Clark
Practice.
May
...
24
24
...
25
Pearce 56
41
Eqnity,
Claims. Drewry ... 12
County Courts. Davis 10
Doctrine and Practice.
Goldsmith
.. 21
Draftsman. Lewis 2
Chute 13
Judicature. Trower 16
Pleader. Drewry ... 40
Roberts 12
Principles.
Suit in. Hunter ... 58
"Equitjfli: Law.
Evidence,
County Court. Davis 10
Discovery of. Hare.. 22
Powell ... 6
of.
..43
Wills. Wigram
Circumstantial ^'i&s 42
LegacyDuties.Shelford so
34
Indian.Statutes, Index.
41
Field
Industrial Societies.
Brabrook
28
82
Rouse
Smith
Law
Frauds.
Law.
Holland
Webb
Bund...
Ecclesiastical.
Practice. Coote ... 59
Judgment. Bayford 59
46
17
65
Pulling-
Jurisprudence.
Conveyancing. Barry 36
Crabb 28
Rouse 32
Pleading. Chitty
Wilson ... 58
Woolrych 26
Oke
Act.
...
Forms,
Domestic Servants.
BayJis
44
Bedford
Foreshores.
Divorce. Practice.
Browning
Intoxicating Liquors
27
Collier
Guide.
11
Hare
Hamel
Phillimore
Articled
Clerks'HandyBook
26
Discovery.
Drainage.
52
...
Dictionary, Law.
Mozley & Wliiteley
57
55
23
'
Examination
Journal
Mosely's
Cnstoms Laws.
Descents.
Law
Page
Law.
International
Deane
Examination
Journal
Cnrate^.
Deeds.
Examinations.
Libel. Starkie
14
49
Life Assurance.
Blayney
56
Lights (Window).
Latham
31
Glen'
3!)
Bedford
A2
...
20
Clifford
Lunacy.
&
39
Rickards 30
Phillips
...
53
f ato
MQxhB ^uhM^t'a h^
IT^ssrs, gxtttefonrtlj.
TREATISE
on the
LAW
Edition.
of
BANKRUPTCY
Irish
Law
Times,
By
and Notes.
*'
We
arm
in extenso
and
late
POWEZiZi ON EVIBENCE.
Fourth Edition;
.
POWELL'S PRINCIPLES
LAW
of
Professor
and
PRACTICE
of the
o-
TJiis edition
We
summary
It is an
of principles." Law
Law of Evidence
a work which can be consulted with
confidence."/mA Law Times.
sion will find Powell's
vols. 8vo.
"The
4:1.
From
It is
"We
From
the
"
its
fully studied."
0-
The
general average
summaxy." Standard.
"Mr.'Crump, we may observe, in
admirable
this
Gazette.
"We
a-
and complete in
tiously
points,
its
details, conscien-
ance."
much
Solicitor^ Jowrnal.
and,
we
differs
mate-
think, advantageously,
MESSRS.
BUTTERWORTH,
BAMEIi'S CUSTOMS
FLEET STREET,
E.C.
I.A\7S.
1876, consolidated
by
direction of the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury. With practical Notes and References throughout; an
Appendix containing various Statutory Provisions incidental to
the Customs
tlie
Customs
Tai-jff
solicitor for
her Ma-
jesty's customs,
SHi:i.FORD'S
great,
it
be,
in
their
proper
and exhaustive.
iNothiogis omitted,
and
recommending
practitioner.
keeps
parts
this
Whoever
edition
possesses
to
it,
tlie
and
iaw Magasini.
0-
10
AND ACTS OP
1875 and
SUPPLEMENT
COUNTY COURT
In
"Such
to a
minimum by numerous
references
and
We
relating to
County Courts.
late to
menV
"The number
of statutes affecting
is
The book
AND EVIDENCE.
EST ACTIONS
Fifth
Davis, of
Edition.
COURTS
22s. calf.
*^*
T/iis
IB-
definitions
of the
have
comprised within
hundred pages.
the desk, and
that Messrs. Mozley and Whiteley's Concise Law Dictionaiy will/ meet with a
large amount of favour." Iaiw Maga-
We
a book which
Irisli
Law
Times.
felt
by
many,
can prophesy
editions."
*
An
Publishers' Ci7'cular.
THE PRINCIPLES
Edition.
EQUITY
as administered in
the
OF JUDICATURE and other Courts
of Equitable Jurisdiction.
By Thomas Archibald Roberts, of
the Middle Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. Third Edition. 8vo.
of
SUPREME COURT
18. cloth.
" This work, "by a member of the
Chancery bar, will meet a want which
must have been ^^elt by every student
is
Law
AND DEFENCES.
CLAIMS and DEFENCES in CASES
intended for the CHANCERY DIVISION of the HIGH COURT
DREVTRY'S FORMS OF CIjAIMS
FORMS
of
OP JUSTICE. With
DE
COIiYAR'S
adopted.
seem
'
to be fairly correct."
Solicitor^
Journal.
needtheaidof aworkthuscompiled,and,
trusting to its ^idance, behelit in time
and labour saved while to the younger
;
Law Tirnes.
On the whole we
Irish
"
can thoroughly
it to our readers."
Imw
Exavdnalion Journal.
"The work is likely to prove useful
recommend
LAW OF GUARANTEES.
A TREATISE
on the
LAW
of
GUARANTEES
and
thoroughnesH.
to predict will
be
and trustworthy statement of the present bearing and seope of the law on all
such questions." SUim^ard,
" The arrangement of the work is
good, the subject
concisely,
added.
is treated
fully yet
The hook
we
is
think, be
found of use to law students as well
as legal practitioners." il^Affwram.
will,
Chute,
Barrister at
or
Law; Fellow
Law
Post 8vo.
The book
^s. cloth.
prudence
Jiazo
it
deserves to be welcomed."
Times.
is
moment." Echo.
'*
Mr. Chute's book is founded upon
lectures delivered by him to the students
at the
is to
Law
Institution.
The
object of
it''
FAW^CETT'S
Fawcett,
Inn, Barrister-at-Law."
14s. cloth.
vol,
Svo.
and
Esq., of Lincoln's
-O
FOIiKARD ON SIiANDER
AND
IiIBEIi^Fourth Edition.
(founded
and Evidence,
Civil and Crinainal, adapted to the present Procedure; also
MALICIOUS PROSECUTIONS and CONTEMPTS of COURT.
By H. C. FoLKARD, Barrister at Law. In One thick vol. Roy.
upon
8vo.
45s. cloth.
Law Magazine.
journal.
"We recommend
HUNT'S
I.AVr
OF FBAUDS
THE LAW
AND BILLS OF
SAIiB.
FRAUDULENT CONVEY-
relating to
ANCES under the Statutes of Elizabeth and the Bankrupt Acts;
with Remarks on the Law relating to Bills, of Sale. By Arthur
Joseph Hunt, of the Inner Temple,^ Esq,,. Barrister at Law, Author
of *'A Treatise on the Law relating to Boundaries, Fences and Foreshores." Post 8vo., 9s. cloth.
"Mr. Hunt has brought to hear upon
the subject a clearness of statement,
an orderliness of arrangement and a
subtlety of logical acuteness which
carry him far towards a complete systematization of all the cases. Neither
has his industry been lacking the cases
that have arisen under "The Bankruptcy Act, 1869," and under the Bills
of Sale Act, have been carefully and
completely noted up and disposed by
:
him
index also
-M
The
E.C. 15
Edition.
of the
COURT of JUSTICE
HIGH
and
tise
We
Non-cootentious Business."
Solicitors'
Journal.
EXAMPLES
^^^
BONDS
for the
exhibiting the principle of various Grants
;
of
the Bonds in
of Administration, and the correct mode of preparing
Oaths; arranged
respect thereof; also Directions for preparing the
With Extracts from Statutes ; also various Forms
for practical utility.
Supplemental
of Affirmation prescribed by Acts of Parliament, and a
PROBATE
COURT
of
'
'
'
Mr, Chadwick'svolumewill be anecessary part of the law library of the practitioner, for he has collected precedents that
arein constant reauirement. Thisispurcly
a book of practice, but therefore the more
valuable. It tells the reader what to do.
and that is the information most required
after a lawyer begins to practise.'* aw
Timet.
.0
16
T^AW
WORKS PUBLISHED BY
A MANUAL
PREVALENCE
of EQUITY,
of tlie
under Section 25 of the Judicature' Act, 1873, amended by the
Judicature Act, 1875. By Charles Francis Trowee, Esq.,
MA., of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law, late Fellow of
Exeter College, and Vinerian Law Scholar Oxford, Author of
" The Law of Debtor and Creditor," " The Law of the Building
of Churches and Divisions of Parishes," &c. 8vo. 5. cloth.
" We congratulate Mr. Trower on
having produced a concise yet compreon the Prevalence of
Equity under the 25th section of the
Judicature Act, which cannot fail to
prove of great service alike to the student
and to practitioners of the common law
branch of the profession, who, uuder
the recent legislation, find themselves
called upon, probably for the first time,
to study and apply in practice the
liensive treatise
now
Law
"The amount
vail,"'
of information con-
Law Journal.
Law
relating to
12mo.
58. cloth.
"We think
are,
this design
The
accomplished.
new law
Salmon Fisheries
Law Magazine.
valuers."
Daily News.
*'
A more complete volume never came
under our notice." Worcester Herald.
" This isa simple and useful summary
CAam-
"He
and Water.
"Mr. Willis Bund has compressed
into a simple and convenient form the
information needful for understanding
thebearingofthe Agricultural Holdings
Act on the law of compensation for unexhausted improvements."
Saiitrday
Review*
SHELFORD'S
Edition,
by Glen,
Laa Magazine.
'*
Mr. lea has done wisely in preserving
that reputation, and, as far as possible, the
text of ^helford though very extensive
alterations and additions have been reqnired. But he haS a claim of his own.
He is a worthy successor of the original
author, and possesses much of the same,
industry, skill in arrangement and astuteness in enumerating the points really decided by cited cases. But we have said
enough of a work already so well known."
LoTii Times.
may
venture
to predict that
Mr,
Cunjting-
IiAWS.
and iEXPLANATIOISr of the STAMP
DUTIES, containing Remarks on the Origin of Stamp Duties, a
History of the Duties in this Country from their commencement
DOTVEIiL'S
A HISTORY
to the present time. Observations on the past and the present State
of the Stamp Laws, an Explanation of the System and the
Administration of the Tax, Observations on the Stamp Duties in
Foreign Countries and the Stamp Laws at present in force in the
United Kingdom ; with Notes, Appendices and a copious Index.
By Stephen Dowell, M.A., of Lincoln's Inn, Assistant Solicitor
8vo.
12. 6d. cloth.
of Inland Revenue.
18
\>y
GRANT'S TREATISE
on the
LAW RELATING
tion existed
Third
With an Appendix
Edition.
and, since
its
informaappearance,
33. calf.
interested in the snbject of this book,
that they will in no respect, be disappointed ; obsolete and immaterial
matter has been eliminated, and tHe
present edition presents the existing
it
at present exists."
Justice of the
Peace.
"
Mr, Fisher
published the second edition of this
practical book, and it now appears again
re-edited by the same hand. Its steady
sale shows that the public for whom it
is written have recognized the kindness
that wan meant them, and makes a
It is eight years since
more
their legal
advisers."
Solicitor^
Journal.
Statutes.
Esq.,
Barrister at
Law, Author of
"A
and
is,
a
that it has no foot notes,
decided recommendation. Thearrangethe
clear,
and
ment is good, the style
work exhaustive. There is a useful appendix of precedents and statutes, and
a very good index." Zow Times.
" This is likely to prove auseful book
in practice. All the ordinary law on the
subject is given shortly and in a convenient and accessible form, and the
index is a good one. The book is of a
portable size and moderate price, and
contains a fairly complete appendix
of precedents. It is likely enough that
this is
"A
Treatise on the
fession
Solicilorf Journal.
book a success."
Law Journal.
IiAVT
THE LAW
KITIES
OF MORTGAGE.Tbird
of
MORTGAGE
19
Edition.
and
OTHER SECU-
72s. calf.
The work
much enlarged
new statutes
not
tion.
'*
On
subjects
amined
it
we have found
the cases
dili-
The
various points
our readers.
It is, as the
author him-
'
the
The
earlier parts of
recast,
which
system
the Digest Commission. This
compreof classification, by adoption of
hensive and formally stated
propositions,
of framing a work of
edition of
this nature, and tlie present
doubt, a
Mr. Fisher's work is, without
is
the right
mode
last edition.
vast improvement on the
excepform and style admit of little
The
in hulk
is
to the subject,
In conclusion we may
compliment Messrs. Butterworths on
the excellent type and correct printing
of these volumes, and the handsome
and convenient style in which they have
formerly cited.
it
great value."
Law
Times.
of the second
edition Its author has bestowed still further consideration on the subject' of
mortgage and other securities upon property during his employment by the
Digest of Law Commissioners. He has
embodied all the recent statutes and decisions
affecting
his
subject, besides
Irish
Lam
Times.
20
Mu
iSeijfori's
laininafion iWanuals.
PROBATE
DIVORCE
to
% LAW
and
as extra
Divorce
Law.
his pupils
of the
SUPREME COURT
of
to
the
JUDICATURE,
Temple.
By the same
A TABLE
in
Is.
of the
an ordinary
JUDICATURE.
A TABLE
By the same
of the
INTERMEDIATE
and
Author, on a Sheet,
Is.
LEADING STATUTES
for the
FINAL EXAMINATIONS
in
Law,
INTRODUCTION TO CONVEYANCING.
PRINCIPLES of CONVEYANCING EXPLAINED and
ILLUSTRATED by CONCISE PRECEDENTS, Withan Appendix
IiEWIS'S
on the
Conveyances.
Land Act
in Modifying
us
much
and Shortening
pleasure.
It
shows a tliorough
may
Jm'EWIS'S
New
'
"We
title
o-
90
Adapted
to the
"We
have read his work with considerable attention and interest, and we
can speak in terms of cordial praise
of the manner in which the new procedure has been worked into the old
material.
Not that the old material
v/e are pleased to see that the present editor has in no way abated his
care in noting up the new cases and explaining the present law and practice,
so that in all essential points the present
edition is a worthy successor to its pre-
decessor." JrisA
it
and
BAINBRIDGE ON MINES.Third
limes.
Edition.
of MINES and
MINERALS.
-It
o-
Law
We
-O
COMMENTAEIES
By
on
INTERNATIONAL LAW.
Robert Phillimore,
of the
6L
High Court
Bs. cloth;
11
of Justice.
Edition.
Knt., P.C.,
Judge
Second Edition.
vols.,
8vo.
28s., Vol. d,
second
Bs, calf.
edition,
may
had
be
separatebj
to complete sets.
'
'
The
authority of this work is admittedly groat, and the learning and ability
displayed in its preparation have been
recognized by writers on public law both
OQ the Continent of Europe and in the
United States. With this necessarily imperfect sketch we must conclude our notice of the first volume of a work which
forms an important contribution to the literature of public law. The book is of great
utility, and one which should find a place
in the library of every civilian." Laai
Mogasine.
"
We
We
We
(.United States^
Daily Advertiser.
"We
We
We
Cp.
October, 1876-
-O
24
I.ORI)S
APPEAi
PRACTICE.
Procedure
and Irish Appeals -with
the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876; the Standing Orders of the
House; Directions to Agents; Forms, and Tables of Costs.
Edited, with Notes, Eeferences and a full Index, forming a complete Book of Practice under the New Appellate System.
By
Charles Marsh Denison and Charles Henderson Scott, of
the Middle Temple, Esqs., Barristers at Law, Very nearly
and Practice
ready, in 1 vol.
8vo. cloth.
CIiARK'S DIGEST OF
the
HOUSE
than in any other, questions can be considered, as they have been, upon purely
legal principles, freed from the fetters
their ofQcial authoritativeness. It is hoped that this Digest will have the eifect of making the
with them."
Pre/atoj^y Notice.
NASHEITH'S INSTITUTES.
THE INSTITUTES
of
History of
"
THE
21s. cloth.
it,
T. ERSKINE MAY'S
Seventli Edition.
25
PARLIAMENTARY PRACTICE,
Book I.
8vo.
cedents.
' Awork, which hasriseu from the position of atext book into that of an authority,
would seem to a considerable exteq^ to
have passed out of the range of criticism.
It is quite unnecessary to point one the excellent arrangement, accuracy and comSleteness which Ions' a-^o rendered SirT. iC,
lay's treatise the standard work on the
law of Parliamenc. Wot only are points of
It is
ao
A MANUAL OF CONSTITUTIONAL
HISTORY,
tory
tant
Fulton's, for practical information, and
for student's purposes, is by far the best
Manual of Constitutional History with
which we are acq,uainted." Jrish Law
Times,
Civil Ser-
vice Gazette.
book
>
26
TUDOR'S
LEADING
CAS]^S
ON
REAIi
PROPERTY
Second Edition.
of LEADING CASES on the LAW
REAL PROPERTY, CONVEYANCING, and the
CONSTRUCTION of WILLS and DEEDS; with Notes. By
A SELECTION
relating
to
and
it is
enough hc
this
moment
to
" lu
on the
new
edition,
with subsequent decisions that have modified or extended the law as previously
expounded. This and the other volumes
of Mr. Tudor are almost a law library in
themselves, aud we are satisfied tl)at the
student would learn more law from t!:e
careful reading of them, than he would
acquire from double the time given to
the elaborate treatises which learued professors recommend the student to peruse,
with eutire forgetfulness that time and
brains are limited, and that to do what
they' advise would be the work of a life,"
Law
Timet,
".This well-tcnown work needs no re-
commendation.
Justice, however, to
Tudor requires us
Mr.
a large library."
WOOI.RYCH ON SEWERS.Third
A TREATISE
this
Jurist.
Edition.
LAW OF SEWERS,
including
6-
citors'
Journal.
E.C.
27
Cutler and Griffin have produced a useful little book, and produced it at a time
when it will be especially useful."
SoUcUois' Journal.
THE DOCTRINE
and
Edition.
PRACTICE
EQUITY:
of
or
a concise Outline of Proceedings in the High Court of Chancery, designed principally for the Use of Students. Sixth Edition, according
and Orders. By George Goldsmith, Esq.,
M.A., Barrister-at-Law, Post 8vo. 18s, cloth.
to the recent Statutes
"A
making of
mecum
in
it
Magazine.
Solicitors' Journal.
HANDY BOOK.
A PRACTICAL HANDY BOOK of ELEMENTARY
LAW designed for the use of ARTICLED CLERKS, with a course
KOSEIiY'S ARTICLED CI.ERKS'
28
Edition^
Shelford.
in
Law and
The
Barrister-at-Law.
Additions, by
Leonard Shelford,
Two
Barrister-at-Law.
vols.
By J. T. Christie, Esq.,
numerous Corrections and
Royal 8vo.
3/. cloth
3L
12s, calf.
*#* This wor^, which embraces both the Principles as well as Ote Practice of Conveyancing,
contains likewise every description of Form wanted for Commercial Purposes.
*'
In carefulness we have inbim a second
Crabb, in erudition Crsbb's superior j and
is a work of which the oriprinal
author would have been proud, could it
have appeared under his own auspices. It
is not a book to be quated, nor indeed
could its meriis be exhibited by quotation.
It is essentially a book of .p'*actice, which
can only be described in rode outline and
dismissedwith applauseand arccommeod-
the resalt
to recommend to snch
the work before us. as the most seoeraliy
useful and convenient collection of precedents in conveyancing, and of comnrerciQi
forms for ordinary use, which are to be
had in the English language." 5o/iVorf'
i?'^.
effected
THE LAW
Act of 1870.
Law, Editor
of
NATURALIZATION as
By John Cutler,
of "Powell's
Law
PRACTICE
of the
the
3s.
Qd, cloth.
The
liy
'*
RALTY of ENGLAND:
Amended
Edition.
HIGH COURT
of
ADMI-
Committee
of
with
"The
Practice
of the Court of
Svo.
***
Probate,''
and with
ii
&c.
Second Edition,
SUPPLEMENT
m Admiralty,
containing
16s. cloth.
Tills
worh
contains every
Common. Form in
BUI of Costs
work on
the Practice in
me
in,
a feature 2^ossesscd by no
Admiralty.
b3
30
HISTORY
of
PRICHARD
Translated by
ROMAN LAW,
and
deserves a
we
LAW OF TRADE-MARKS;
TREATISE on the
with the Trade-Marks Regulation Act, 1875, and the Lord ChanBy F. M. Adams, of the Middle Temple, Esq.,
cellor's Rules.
Barrister at Law.
Svo.
7.s.
&d. cloth.
"Acomprehensivetreatiseonthesubjectofthelawoftrade^marks Wecan
"2".^l.^:V=*''.r.;..r:i ^.'^"
j^:;;;^i.?^^S^'iCSr?^
CIiIFFORD
''Jl^^t^?'^'^^''^"-^"^"''^'^-
THE PRACTICE
PRIVATE BILLS
of the
COURT
of
REFEREES
PARLIAMENT;
on
Law.
2 Vols.
in
Royal Svo.
6d,.%
and Vol.
and
1876,
PRIVATE BILLS
Clifford and A.
G-.
by the
in
itself." JVjne*.
"
1873,
on
COURT OF REFEREES
PARLIAMENT.
By Frederick
I.
useful
at
Law, Post
6s. cloth.
KEIiItY'S
courts."Pwi/ie Opi7iion,
CONVEYANCING DRAFTSMAN.
THE DRAFTSMAN
is
to
Ziazf Journal.
" It
A TREATISE
LAW
WINDOW
of
on the
Temple,
Inner
the
Latham,
of
Law
Francis
By
Law. Post 8vo. 10s. cloth.
"This
is
with
profit.
Solicitors' Journal.
IiATHAiyi
it
tical observations.''
office,
6s, cloth.
LIGFITS.
Esq., Barrister at
The work
compliment the
autlior
on
it."
Law
Journal.
"O
34
DO^VELL'S INCOME
TAX
I.AWS.
Solicitor of Inland
Revenue.
8vo.
"We
POWXLL'S
JmA-W
Inn, Assistant
carefally and
conscientiously he performs what he
undertakes." Justice of the Peace.
especially as
By Edhukd
Principles
** The
treatise before ns states the law of
which it treats ably aad clearly, and con*
ners."Lam Times.
/'Mr. Poweirs
SoHcitori' Journal.
writing is singalarly pre-
ciseaDdcondensed,withoutbe:ngataU dry,
as chose who have read his admirable book
of Evidence will attest. It will be seen,
from oar outline of the contents, how exhaastireiythe sobjectbasbeentreated.and
that
antborities."Jun'<(.
" The tt^o chapters on the Railway and
Canal Traffic Act, 1856,are quite new, and
the recent cases uader the provisions of
that statute are analyzed in lucid laa-
guage."
Law Magazine.
COMPENDIUM
Founded upon the
of the
IiAVTI
Treatises of Pachta,
Von Vangerow,
Arndts,
By Fkederick J.
ToMKiNs, Esq., M.A., D.C.L., Author of the " Institutes of Roman
Law," Translator of " Gaius," &c., and Henry Diedrxch Jencken,
Franz Mohler, and the Corpus Juris
Esq., Barristers at
Civilis.
Svo.
14s, cloth.
TURE.
THE PRACTICE
JUDICATURE
of the
35
E.C.
SUPREME COURT
of
Chancery of the
such jurisdiction
High Court
Courts.
One
is
By LOCOCK Webb,
1877,
(Just published.')
late
and Quarries."
DAVIS'S
1 vol.,
A MANUAL
peal,
the Poor
of the
with a
;
LAW
21s. cloth.
of
REGISTRATION
and
Ap-
whole Work.
12mo.
868-1869
8vo.
LAW
ELECTIONS
demy
Esq., Barrister at
to the
Law.
15s. cloth,
*,* The
SUPPLEMENT may
3*.
sewed.
0-
36
A TREATISE
on
the
PRACTICE
of
CONVEY-
felt.
Mr. Barry's work is
what it professes to be, a.
on the practice of conveyancing,
in which the theoretical rules of real
property law are referred to only for tlie
purpose of elucidating the practice. The
Jins
essentially
treatise
So/icitort* Journai,
We
mend
feel
it
bound
to
strongly recom-
Law Magazine.
" Readers who recal the instruction
they gathered from this treatise when
published week by week in the pages of
the * Law Times' will be pleased to learn
that it has been re-produced in a handsome volume, which will be a welcome
addition to the law library. The information that the treatise so much admired
may now be had in the more convenient
form of a book will suffice of itself to
secure a large and eager demand for it."
proval."
Law Timet,
"The work
is
clearly
and agreeably
FORMS
and
PRECEDENTS
in
CONVEYANCING
By W. Whittaker
HERTSIiET'S TREATIES.
HERTSLET-S TREATIES
of Commerce, Navigation,
Vol. 1, price 12s.; Vol. 2, price lis.; Vol. 3, price 18. ; Vol. A,
price 18. ; Vol. 5, price 20. ; Vol. 6, price 25*. ; Vol. 7, price 30*.;
Vol. 8, price 30. ; Vol. 9, price 30*. ; Vol. 10, price 30.; Vol. 11,
Vol. 12, price 40*., may be had separately to complete
Vol. 12 incluiles an Index of Subjects to the Twelve published
Volumes, which Index is also sold separately, price 10*. cloth.
price 30s.;
sets.
HERTSIiET'S TREATIES
E.C.
31
Law and
Practice of
LETTERS PATENT
for
INVEN-
By Clement
8vo.
the subject.
been
to
summary of
We
long
'*
VEYANCING
in
SOLICITORS' OFFICES,
of
CON-
of Pembrote Coll.
6s, cloth.
By Edmund Smith,
Solicitor.
B.A., lato
Post 8vo.
38
Edition.
OWNERS
terests in
: being a Treatise on the Law of the Compensation for InLands, &c. payable by Railway and other Public Companies;
Second Edition. By J . J. Elmes, of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barristerat-Law. Post 8vo. 12s. cloth.
**
whether for compaoies taking land or
it, Mr. Ingram's volume will he a
welcome ^nide. with this in his hand the
legal adviser of a company, or of an owner
and occupier whose property is taken, and
who demands compensation for it. cannot
holding
titioner."
Laa Magazine.
SCRIVEN ON COPVHOI.DS.Fifth
Edition by Stalman.
Abridged
in 1
voL royal
THE LAW
of
CHARITABLE TRUSTS;
with the
Statutes, including those to 1869, the Orders, Regulations and Instructions issued pursuant thereto, and a Selection of Schentes, with Notes.
ing
all
E.G.
39
Barrister at
THE LAW
Edition.
relating to the
SUCCESSION DUTIES
LAND, including all the
PROBATE, LEGACY
and
ENGLAND, IRELAND
and SCOTStatutes and the Decisions on tbose Subjects : with Forms and Official Regulations,
By Leonakd Shelford,
Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. The Second Edition,
widi many Alterations and Additions. 12mo. 16!;. cloth.
in
zine,
ACTS,
1861
GAIUS'
12mo.
Esq., Barrister-at-Law.
lOj. cloth.
THE COMMENTARIES
of
GAIUS
on the
ROMAN
LAW:
KmiJ/m
The iulhors have done a good service
Law, and deserve
to the stGdy
* "
" ' "'of lloman
'
'
.."onj of ,^,
o valuable contributions
-O
02
40
A CONCISE MANUAL
of the
LAW
VENDORS
of
with a Supplement, including the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, with
Notes. By Henry Seaborne. Post 8vo. 9. cloth.
;
*#* 77m5
-
a good
We
summary
THE INSTITUTES
of
ROMAN LAW.
Part
I.,
con-
taining the Sources of the Roman Law and its External History till
the Decline of the Eastern and Western Empires.
By Fredbkick
ToMKiNS, M.A., D.C.L., Barrister at Law, of Lincoln's Inn. Royal
Svo. 12s. cloth.
(To be completed in Three Parts.)
A CONCISE TREATISE
PLEADING,
with Precedents.
SERVANTS, by Honckton.
and
their Advantages.
'
9-
^
^
By
and an Introduction,
C.
Koyal 8vo.
1 vol.
42s. cloth.
INDEX
TO,
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
THE INDIAN STATUTE BOOK
General Introduction
to the Statute
Work
continuing the
to
Imperial 4to.
BRANDON'S
I.A'W
A TREATISE
Law
INDIAN STATUTES.
INDEX TO,
OF, and
of India.
By
August, 1872.
Civil Service.
at
C.
With Supplement
D. Field, M.A.,
42s. cloth.
OF FOREIGN ATTACHMENT.
upon
the
CUSTOMARY LAW
of
By Woodthorpe Brandon,
8vo.
Esq.,
of the
14s. cloth.
WHAT
IS
NOT.
IS
Treatise comprising
Law.
all
By Joseph Moseley,
Post 8vo.
Esq., B.C.L.,
5s. cloth.
A HISTORY
of
EDUCATION
for
the
ENGLISH
Amendment,
Law.
8vo.
9s. clotli.-
42
THE LAW
of
PARSONAGES,
and
the
BUILDING
of
CHURCHES,
SCHOOLS,
37te
*'
men
good book on
IiA\(r OF PE^VS.
of
and the
By Alfred Heales, F.S.A.,
SEATS
Doctors'
or
PEWS.
Commons.
vols.
CHURCH
LAW
THE HISTORY
8vo.
Proctor in
16s. cloth.
and learning."
THE LAW
INDUSTRIAL
and
and
PRACTICE
of
CO-OPERATIVE
or
PROVIDENT SOCIETIES;
including the
of France on the
6s. cloth.
MANUAL
NAVAL
WIIiIiS
ON EVIDENCE.Fourth Edition.
on the PRINCIPLES of CIRCUMSTAN-
AN ESSAY
TIAL EVIDENCE.
Illustrated
O-
Barrister at
LaW.
by numerous
Edition.
Cases.
By
Sto.'IOs. cloth.
the late
Alfred
E.C.
43
Wiqram, the rales of law are slated, discussed and explained in a manner which
Has excited the admiration of every judge
who has had to consult it"Lord Kings0sni.
a Privy Couneil Judgment, Juip
<i<A,
looo.
oi^raced or
Wigram
arising-
out
propositions,
of Sir James
some
propositions
By W.
Svo.
***
77ie
Copyright^
'
t/ie
tJie
relying on
work
commencement to their
elusion.
The bill book
cU
page 274.
Tiltimate con
contains pre"
Journal.
44
and 1876.
Under the
PARTITION ACTS,
of the
Law,
Post
cloth.
8vo.,
A TREATISE
DARIES
and
on
FENCES,
LAW
the
and
to the
relating
to
BOUN-
Edition.
Barrister at
Law.
12mo.
Second Edition.
Second
Mr. Hunt's valuable book. It is sufficient here to say that'the volume ought
to have a larger circulallnn than ordinarily belongs to law books, that it ought
to be found in evjry country gentleman's
library, that the cases are brought down
to the latest date, and that it is carefully prepared, clearly \fritten, and well
"There
are
of litigation
Law MagazvAe.
" it speaks well for this book^ that it
passed intoasecondedition.
soon
has so
That its utility has been appreciated is
shown by its success. Mr. Hunt has
availed himself of the opportunity of a
second edition to note up all the cases to
this time, and to extend considerably
edited.''
GRANT'S
IiAW^
Times.
much new
OF CORPORATIONS IN GENERAIi.
A PRACTICAL TREATISE
PORATIONS in GENERAL,
on the
LAW
of
COR-
Municipal Corporations, Railway, Banking, Canal and other JointStock and Trading Bodies,
Universities, Colleges,
Corporations
Parsons, &c.
rister at
O-
Law.
sole,
as Bishops,
By James Grant,
Royal 8vo.
Esq., of the
26s, boards-
BUND'S
IiAVr
THE LAW
E.G.
45
OP SALMON FISHERIES.
SALMON
relating to the
FISHERIES
of ENGLAND and WALES, as amended by " The Salmon
;''
Fishery Act, 1873
-witli the Statutes and Cases.
By J. W.
Willis Bund, MA., LL.B., of Lincoln's Inn, Baii-ister. at Law,
Vice-Chairman Severn Fishery Board. Post 8vo. 15s. cloth.
From tie TAirteentA Anmtal Rsport of Inductor Bveiland on Salmrni Fisheries, 1874.
^?**'? ^'**i i '*"* place to express my approTal of * bund's Law of Salmon Fisheries
>n r
i^ngland and Wales, with Stattttesand Coses.* This work will afford great assists oce
to those engaged id administeriog the law. while it affords valuable information on the
theory and practice of Salmon legislation in general."
.^?"' *^* '^Aineenth Animal Report of Inspector Wafpote on Sahnoti Fis/ieries. 1874.
iWr. Willis Buad, the Draftsman ot the new Act, has puUJished an iuipoTtanc treatise
on the whole of the Salmon Fishery Acts, which has already been accepted as a complete exposition of those Statntes.*'
" Doubtless all the law will be found
tfud the decision upon each made plain.
between his covers, and we have not been
Mr. Bund has done the work excellently
able to detect soy erroneous -statements.
well, and nothing further in this way can
'We can recommend the bviok as a disquibe desired." 3'Aff jFiWrf.
" We have always found his opinion
sition. it is conscientiously executed."
Itaa Times,
sound, end his explanations clear and
* With
Mr. Bund's work at his elbow,
lucid. This volume must of necessity bethe inquirer will find it tolerably easy work
come a handbook to sal mon fishers in genefor Mr. Bund has with grent skill and labour
ral, and especially to hoards of conservadone all the most troublesome work for
tors, who will thereby be much assisted in
him, and each point of law is marked out
the formation of the new boards of conserso that there can be no difficulty in undervators, under the Act of 1873; also the
standing it, for not only are the points unoperation of the Acts of 186) and 1865. as
ravelled and discussed, but the cases which
amended by the Act of 1873."Xand and
The
enlarged, and treating the subject in the Legal, Practical and Mathematical Points of View; giving numerous Forms, Rules, Tables and
Instructions for Calculating the Values of the Lord's Rights; Suggestions to Lords' Stewards, and Copyholders, protective of their several
Interests, and to Valuers in performance of their Duties; and including the Act of 1858, and Proceedings in Enfranchisement under it.
By RoLL\ Rouse, Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law.
Third Edition, much enlarged. 12mo. lOi. 6rf. cloth.
'
This
new edition
its predecessor,
2.
The
Practice,
to Lords,
3.
The Ma<
him
fully prepared, exceedingly well composed and written, and to indicate much
experience in copyhold law on the part
of the author," Solicitors' Journal,
c 5
46
liAW
COIflilER'S IiA^V
WORKS PUBLISHED BY
OF CONTRIBXTTORZES.
LAW OF CONTRIBU-
TREATISE ON THE
TORIES
in the
and
Jommal.
" MrCollier has not shrunk from pointing out his views as to the reconcilability
of apparently conflicting decisions or as
to many points on which the law is still
unsettled; without making any quotations for the purpose of illustrating the
above remarks, we think we are justified in commending this treatise to the
favourable consideration of the profession." Iioa Journal.
*'
Mr. Robert Collier's treatise on the
subject deserves attention beyond the
limits of his profession. The chapter
showing the modes in which liability
may be incurred is full of instructive
warning." Saturday Review.
" The perplexity of the laws relating
to personal liability, naturally suggests
a collection of precedents and cases
which may be considered settled, and of
direct application to the generality of
cases; and this the author appears to
MT^nosum.
tention,
BUIiIiEV
F. Bullev, B.A.,and J.
W. Willis-Bund, M.A.,
T/ie
s-
it.
LL.B,,
work
Times,
iWagisterial Wlof^^
fig
E.C.
47
Mr. a^U
almost every other branch of our jurisprudence, goes on growing almost every
day of the legal year, and a new edition
of such a work as this every few years
means no small amount of labour on the
part of the editor. The array of statutes
which have been passed during the last
four years requiring the 'attention of
justices is formidable enough,a3 appears
by Mr. Saunders's preface. We are glad
to see that Mr. Saunders has bestowed
great care in the revision of the Index,
which is now a feature in the work,"
Law
{_Mr.
0M&
Works continued
over.
LAW
48
WORICS PUBLISHED BY
Oke's Slagisterial Ponnnlist ; beings a Complete CollecForms and Pi-ecedents for practical use in all Cases out of
tion of
By George
and Constables.
improved.
By Thomas W. Saunders,
Recorder of Bath.
"The
In
1 vol.
Svo.
very useful
Law Magazine.
o-
C. Oke, Author of
Law,
Mx.
49
Journal.
**
The arrangement
in
chapters by
cise statement of the effect of the legislation repealed by the late act. He also
"
Oke's
Law
of Turnpike
apart." ZTieJVeirf.
" The editorship of the present
publi-.
lighteningthemselves onasubjectwhicU
closely affects
Roads
them."Xani? m\d
Walei:
the Acts
of the General Acts now in force, including those of 1861
as to Union of Trusts, for facilitating Arrangements with their
Creditors ; as to the interference by Railways with Roads, their Nonrepair, and enforcing Contributions from Parishes, &c., practically
With Cases, copious Notes, all the necessary Forms, and
arranged.
an elaborate Index, &c. By GEonoE C. Oke. Second Edition.
;
12mo.
]S. cloth.
50
M.A.,
Published on
tJte
respective
Final Examination in
XXSX
Eaater, 1877.
Ko.
III. Intermediate Examination,
r. The Statntefi of 1B76 (Third Notice).
II. Dieeet of Cases.
January, 1677: Questions and Answers.
IV, Final Examination. April, 1877: Qneations and
Answers. V. Review : Roberts's Principles of Equity. VI. Correspondence and Notices.
XXX.
Hilary, 1877.
No.
Statutes nf 1B76 (Second Notice). II. Rnles of the Supreme C!oiirt, December, 1S76. III. Di^eHt
of Canes. IV. Intermediate Examination, November, 1876: Qaestlons and Answers. V. Final
Kxamination, January, 1677: auestions and Answers. VI. Reviews. VII. (^rrespondeace and
I.
Notices.
XXIX
No.
Michaelmas, 1876.
Statutes of 1876 CFiMt Notice). II. Rules of the Supreme Court. June, 1876. III. Intermediate
Examination, June, 1876: Qaeetlons and Answers. IV. Final Examination, November, 1876: QuesV. NoticesofthelnterraedfateExamfnations for IB77. VI. Correspondence and
I.
No.
I.
XXVII. Easter,
1876.
Notices for the June and November Examinations, 1876. II. Further Extracts from the Rules of
III. Statutes of IB75 (CThird Notice). IV. D{ge*t nf Cases.
V. Intermediate
2, 1875.
lB7f:: Qnestions and Answers.
VL Final Examination, AdHI, 1B76:
VII, The New Law Dictionary. VIII. Revlens of Books. IX. Corre-
Nnvemher
Examination, January,
Questions and Answers.
spondence and Notices.
I,
No,
XXV,Michaelmas, 187.5.
statute of Fraudulent Conveyances. 13 EIlz. c. 5. II. Statutes of 1875 First Notice. UL Di?e>t
nf Cases. IV. Intermediate Examination, Trinity Term, 1875: Qnesttons and Answers. V, final
Examination, Michaelmas Term, 1B75: Questions and Answers. VI. Reviews of BoAks. VII. Correspondence and Notices.
Trinity, 1875.
No.
III. Intermediate Examination, Easter
II. Digest of Cases.
I, The Statute of Uses, continued.
Term, 1675: Quesiions and Answers. IV, Final Examination, Trinity Term, 1S75; Questions and
Answers. V. A New Law Di^dlonary, VI. Correspondencie and Notices.
I.
XXIV.
I.
No.
XXII. Hilary,
1875.
and
sDondence
*^
K otices.
XX._
___
No.
Trinity. 1874,
Legislative Prospects of the Session, II. Digest of Cases. Ill, Intermediate Examination. Easter Term, 18T4: Questions and Answers. IV. Final Examination. Trinity
Term, 1874: Questions aud Answers. V, Reviews. VI, Correspondence and Notices,
I.
No.
e-
-o
THE
E.G.
51
IiAVT
No. XVI.Trinity,
Notice). III.
Questions and.
and Answers
Books. Vlil.
1873.
ill. Digest of
nf the Law, concluded.
I, Leadioff Case* : Spencer's Case, continuptl.
fV. Interniediate Examination, Easier, i873: Questions an* Answeri*. V. Final Examlnatinn, Triniiy, 1673: QuestiODS ana Answers.
VI.
Kevlew: Kelly'd Draftsman. VII. Corrcs1.
The Stud*
Cases.
uondeiiceaad Notices.
XV,Easter,
No.
1873.
No.
XIV.Hilary, 1873.
The Stiidvofthe Law, continued. II. Di^e'^tof CadFs. III. Intermediate Examination, Michaelmas Term,'l879: Questions and Answers. IV. Final Examlnaijop, Hilary Term, 1873: Questions
r.
Vf.
Answers
No.~
and
lo Correspondents
XIII. Michaelmas,
Noiices.
1872.
Pahlic Prosectitors, concluded. IL TheStatulesof 1872. III. Digest of Cases. IV. Intermediate
Examination, Triniiy Term, 1872: Questions and Answers. V. Final Examlnalion, Michaelmas
Term, 1B73: Qaestiuns and Answers. VL Reviews. VII. Answers to Correspondents and Notices.
I.
No.
XII.Trinity,
1872.
Public ProBPcntors, continued. IT. Stndy of the Law, continued. II Digest of Cases.- IV. IntermediateExaminationCEa6terTer^l,lS72)QueslionsandAnswera. V. FiralExamination (Trinity Term,
1872) Que-tions and Answen. VI. Law Students Congress, Birmingham: LawExaminationB. VILA
Review : Huut'sLaw of Fraudulent Conveyances and Bills of Sale. VIlI. Answers to Correspondents.
I
No.
XI. Easter,
1872.
The Stndy f the Law. 11. Legislative Prospects of the Session : Married Women's Property Act
A'mendnipnt Bill Imperial Court of AppeaL IIL Digest of Cases. IV. Intermediate Exaraiiiatioii
QnestJoni and Answers (Hilary Term, 1872). V. final Examinatipn Questions aad Answers (Eabter
lerm, 1872). VL Answers to Correspondents,
I
No.
X. Hilary,
1872.
Notice of the late Editor. II. The Stndy of the Law. III. Digest of Cases. IV. Intermediate Examination Qnestions and Answers (Michaelmas, 1871). V. Final Examination Questions and Answers
(Hilary, 1872). VL Answers to Correspondents.
r
No,
IX. Michaelmas,
1871.
^^ VII I. -Trinity,
1871.
L HowMr.ManslieidDenman
theNeceisityof providinsaPahlicProBecutor: bythcEditor.
,I^w=Pii-"hvE H IlirDiEestofCMefl. Note by the Editor. IV. Intermediate Examination
Sn^i^JS^^^^erfcLtir] imf. V. Final ExaminUn Questions and Answers (Trinhy, 1871).
I
On
VI.
CorrespondeDce, &c.
Copies of Vol.
*
I.
of the
Lam Examination
Journal, containing
Ms.
1 to 14,
to
complete copies
52
containing
all
%* JVo.
THE
AND
Formerly of ELing's College, London ; Author of "The Student's Examination Guide," &c.
Novr Complete in Eighteen Numbers, containing all the Qnestionsj with Answers, from 1871 to 1875, and to he had in
1 Vol. 8to., price 18s. cloth.
Nos.
I-
to
1.
each,
by post
1. \d.
being a Compre-
must commend
E.C.
53
THE
By CHARLES SHAW,
Containing a Kecord of the Members of the English Bar, their Inns of Court, Dates
of Admission and Call, together -with their Academical Degrees, Appointments,
Circuits, &c. Students, their Inns of Court and Dates of Admission, Sees, Modes
of Admission, Keeping Terms, Preliminary Examination, Lectures, General Examination, Consolidated Regulations of the Four Inns of Court, &c. Honours, Studentships and Exhibitions Lists of the Judges and OlBcers of the Supreme Court of
j
Judicature, &c..
Sic.
THE PRACTICE
and
including
the ActS) Rules, Orders, Copious Notes of Cases and Forms of
Practical Proceedings, with Tables of Costs. By W. Ernst
Browning, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. Post
8vo. 8s. cloth.
for
eiiEN'S
The
of the
Edition.
BOARD;
Statutes, Cases
PRY'S SPECIPIC
of
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTS.
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
CONTRACTS, including those of Public Companies. By Edward
A TREATISE
on the
PBIIiIiIPS'S IiATV
Barrister at
Law,
OF LUNACY.
J.UNATICS, IDIOTS,
UNSOUND
" Mr. Phillips has, in his very completf, elaborate and useful volume, pre-
Ufiviea,
tiie
54
HOI.I.AND
LAW^.
ESSAYS
By Thomas
College, and
Professor of International Law in the University of
Oxford, and of Lincoln's Inn, Esq., Barrister at Law 8vo. 7. Qd.
Chicliele
cloth.
AtheruBum.
Entitled to very higli commendaLam Timet.
'*
Tile essays of an antlior so well
qualified to write upon the subject."
Law Journal.
" Wecanconfidentlyrecommend these
'*
tion."
LAW
VrsIGHT ON THE
THE LAW
OF CONSPIBACY.
CRIMINAL CONSPIRACIES
of
Coll.,
Oxford.
"
thorough work. It shows not merely unsparing and well directed research, but
a power of discrimination and analysis
of which it^is rarely our good fortune to
meet with, and its matter is conveyed in
language equally remote from the dry
and withered style of the ordinary text-
CHITTY,
Jtm.,
8vo.
4s. clotb.
PRECEDENTS IN PLEADING.3rd
PRECEDENTS
CHITTY,
and
Barrister
Edition.
PLEADING;
in
Jtin.,
with
copious Notes on Practice, Pleading and Evidence, by the late
Joseph Chittt, Jun., Esq. Third Edition. By the late Toufson
Chittt, Esq., and by Leofric Tehfle, R. G. Williams, and
Charles Jeffery,
Esqrs., Barristers at
Law.
LOVESV'S
The
IiAAV
LAW of ARBITRATION
WORKMEN,
between
MASTERS
antl
B.C.
_,
55
'
Common Law
Practice.
By
Dixon.
Edition.
of
COURTS
Supreme Appellate
in the
Lord O'Hagan.
8vo.
to the
Geneva
Law.
8vo.
tjie
Is.
of the
Arbitration.
2s.
Jurisdiction.
House of Lords on
Alahama
Speech delivered
By the Right Hon.
By James O'Dowd,
Esq., Barrister at
sewed.
High Chancellor
Law
of Costs in Actions
and
other PROCEEDINGS in the Courts of Common Law at Westminster. By John Gray, Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at
Law. 8vo. 21s. cloth.
ii
Work embraces the whole modern Law and Practice of Costs, includiog thfc
important provisions of the Common Law Procedure Act and Rules, 185S, and the
recent Statutes affecting the Jurisdiction of the County Courts.
This
Pnlling's Practical
Compendium
MERCANTILE ACCOUNTS
of the
of
in Equity,
SUPPLEMENT,
containing the
Law
By
AccounU, under the Winding-up Acts of 1848 and 1849.
Alexander Pulling, Esq. of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law.
12mo. 9s. boards.
Hamel's International Law.International Law in connexion with Municipal Statutes relating to the Commerce, Rights and
Liabilities of the Subjects of Neutral States pending Foreign War;
considered with reference to the Case of the " Alexandra," seized
under the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act. By Felix
Hakgrave Hamel, of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. Post 8vo.
3s.
sewed.
Keyset on the
Law
12rao. 8. cloth.
56
The
pending
Legislation Reviewed, with Suggestions for the proper Foundation of a Law University.
Paper read at the Provincial
Meeting of the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom,
held at Liverpool, 14th October, 1875. By C. T. Saunders, a
Member of the Council. 8vo. Is. sewed.
cloth.
" Gurney's is, we believe, admitted to be the best of the many systems."
.'is.
12mo.
6rf.
taw Times.
By William Sidney
of Lord lyndhurst.
Gibson, Esq., M.A,, F.S.A., Barrister at Law, of Lincoln's Inn.
Second edition, enlarged. 8vo. Is. 6d. cloth.
Memoir
Circuit.
Civil Service
CASES
of the
of India 8vo,
Is.
sewed.
On Reporting
London.
cloth,
Gaches'
Town
Councillors
a
popular Digest of Municipal and Sanitary Law, with information
as to Charters of Incorporation, and a usefiil Collection of Form?,
especially adapted for newly Incoi-porated Boroughs. By Louis
Gaches, L.L.M., B.A., of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister at
Law. Post Svo. 7s. cloth.
Solicitor.
Common Law
New Rules
Table of Officers'
of Practice and Pleading, with Notes. By
Henry Greening, Esq., Special Pleader. Second Edition. ]2mo.
10s. 6d. boards.
;
Browne's Practical Treatise on Actions at Law, embracing the subjects of Notice of Action; Limitation of Actions;
necessary Parties to and proper Forms of Actions, the Consequence
of Mistake therein
and the Law of Costs with reference to Damages. By Rowland Jay Browne, Esq., of Lincoln's Inn, Special
Pleader. 8vo. 1 6s. boards.
;
Deane's
Law of Blockade,
Hew
Bankruptcy
Linklater's Digest of and Index to the
By John Linklater,
Act, and the accompanying Acts of 1869.
Second Edition. Imperial Svo. 3s. 6d. sewed.
Solicitor.
Pothier's
Treatise
on the
Contract
of
Partnership.
Translated from the French, with Notes, by O. D. Tudor, Esq., BarSvo. ds. cloth.
rister at Law.
Law and
Practice relating to
By John Paxton
Norman, M.A., of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. Post Svo.
LETTERS -PATENT
for
INVENTIONS.
Law
FranciUon's
ELEMENTARY
Series.
Foreshore Eights.
at Withernsea.
NicholHeard 31st
>
E.C.
By
S. J.
HuNTES,
Sixth Edition
by
W. Lawkancb,
Gr.
Law.
Law
9s. cloth.
A Treatise
College, Oxford.
8vo.
1/. Is.
New
How
to procure Outfalls by
Drains, or the Improvement of Existing Drains, in the Lands of an
Drainage of Land:
Adjoining Owner, under the Powers contained in Part III. of the Act
Property in England, from the time of the Saxons to the present jEra,
displaying at one view the Tenures,
Modes
on a
all
roller, Ss.
of Descent
and Power of
On
Law
Students.
ham
Law
May, 1872.
Legal Education
Students' Societies.
8vo.
By W.
2s.
A. Jevons.
Held
Birming-
at
sewed.
1871.
Paper read at
Lecture
By
8vo.
Is.
sewed.
lEcclesiastical HaU).
Tbe Case of
Gorham
ttie Rev. G. C.
against the Bishop
ot iixeter, as heard and determined by the Judicial
Committee of ti\e
Commons, &c.
One
Jingland
sewed.
i>-
The
Law
Schools,
9s. el.
By
PROTESTANT CURATES and the RESIDENCE of INCUMBENTS or their BENEFICES in ENGLAND and IRELAND.
By C. D. Field, M.A., LL.D., of Her Majesty's Bengal
Author of the Law of Evidence in India, &c. Post 8vo.
Civil Service;
6s. cloth.
Orlen's
of Public Health
Ninth Edition. In ] voL Svo.
The
Hehrt Lawbehce,
of Lincoln's
A Collection
Law.
Second
edition.
By
J.
By
W.Willis Bund,
In 12mo.
English Bar, their Inns of Court, Dates of Admission and Call, together with
their Academical Degrees, Appointments, Circuits, &c ; Students, their Inns of
Court, Dates of Admission, Fees, Mode of Admission, Keeping Terms, FreUminary Examination, Lectures, General Examination, See; Honours, Studentships,
Exhibitions, &c.. Sic. By Ckabi:es Shaw, Esq., Under Treasurer of the Middle
Temple. Post Svo., St. (To be continued annually.)
Popular Monthly
Law Tracts.
In Svo.
Imprinted at London,
nvmber Seuen in Flete
1553-1877.