and being embarrassed in its decision by defects in the pleadings, has permitted amendments, both of Bills and answers, under very special circumstances. Where new matter has been discovered, either by the plaintiff or the defendant, before a decree has been pronounced, deciding on the rights of the parties, a supplemental or a cross Bill has been permitted, to bring such matter before the Court, to answer the purposes of justice; instead of allowing an amendment of a Bill or answer, where the nature of the matter discovered would admit of its being so brought before the Court. And after a decree, upon a similar discovery, a Bill of Review, or a Bill in nature of a Bill of Review, has been allowed for the same purpose ; both these forms of proceeding being in their nature similar to amendments of Bills or answers, calculated for the same purposes, and generally admitted under similar restrictions. It may, however, happen, that by the mistake, or negligence, or ignorance of parties, their rights may be so prejudiced by their pleadings, that the Court cannot permit important matter to be put in issue by any new proceeding without so much hazard of inconvenience, that it may be better, that the individual should suffer an injury, than that the administration of justice should be endangered by allowing such proceeding. * $ 906. The remarks contained in the last section, constitute the closing paragraph of Lord Redesdale's great work on Equity Pleadings; and they furnish a fit admonition for the close of the present imperfect Commentaries. Upon a careful review of the whole 1 Mitf. Eq. Pl. by Jeremy, 331. subject, the attentive reader will perceive, that the task of mastering so complicated a science will require from him the employment of many hours of deep study, of laborious research, and of undivided diligence. He must give his days and his nights to it with an earnest and unflinching devotion. But the rewards will amply repay him for all bis toils. He, who has attained a thorough knowledge of Equity Pleadings, cannot fail to have become a great Equity Lawyer. He need not shrink from the most difficult and complicated engagements of his profession. Nay, he will find, that while many others are willing to rely on their own genius, with a rash and delusive selfcomplacency, to carry them through the intricacies of a controverted suit, he may far more justly and safely repose on a solid learning, which will secure respect, and a trained and varied discipline, which will command confidence. To no human science better, than to the Law, can be applied the precepts of sacred wisdom, in regard to zeal and constancy in the search for truth. Here, the race may not be to the swift; but assuredly the battle will be to the strong. INDEX. The references are to the Sections. A. ABATEMENT, , SECTIONS in Equity, meaning of 354 when a suit is abated or not 329, 330, 354, 356, 357 obscurity in books respecting 329, 330 by death 330, 331, 354, 356 by marriage of plaintiff 354 pleas in nature of pleas of abatement in Equity 708 at what time put in . 708 matter in abatement available only by plea, generally, 708 ACCIDENT, jurisdiction in Equity in cases of 472 ACCOUNT, who proper parties to a bill to account 218 plea of account stated, or settled, when a bar or not 798 ACKNOWLEDGMENT. (See Admission.) when evidence or not 263, 264, 265. a. ADDRESS OF BILL, what 26 how Court described 26 names of parties, how stated in 26 ADMINISTRATION, who are proper parties in cases of . 170 - 179 foreign, effect of . 167 ADMINISTRATOR AND EXECUTOR, when a proper party or not 170-177 foreign, whether he may sue or be sued 179 objection that plaintiff is not, when to be taken by demurrer. 496 when objection to be taken by plea 722, 727, 728 title of plaintiff in litigation 511, 512 plea that defendant is not administrator or executor 732 ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS, how charged in a Bill 263, 264, 265. a. ADMISSIONS IN ANSWER, not evidence unless put in issue 263, 264, 265. a. AFFIDAVIT, to bill, when necessary • 288, 313, 477 to bill to take testimony de bene esse 309 to bill to perpetuate testimony 304 tates, devised to trustees for that purpose, and subject to that charge, in strict settlement; and the answers of the tenant for life, and of the first remainder-man in tail, who was an infant, were not replied to; the Court on the hearing, directed, that the plaintiffs should be at liberty to reply to those answers, and to exhibit interrogatories, and to prove their debts against those defendants, as they had before proved them against the trustees; and it reserved the consideration of the directions necessary to be given upon such new proof.' § 894. Secondly; As to amendments on the part of the defendant. A defendant may amend his pleading; but this is allowed with much more caution than in the case of a plaintiff. A demurrer cannot, (as a plea may,) be good in part and bad in part, with reference to its extent, or to the quantity of Bill covered by it; and if it is too general, it must be overruled. But the Court has a discretion, if a fair case is made, to give the defendant leave to amend, and narrow it, upon proper terms, which is a guard upon the practice. § 895. With respect to the amendment of pleas, there certainly have been cases, in which the Court has permitted them to be amended, where there has been an evident slip or mistake, and the material ground of defence seemed to be sufficient. Yet the Court always expects to be told precisely, what the amendment is to be, and how the slip happened, before it will allow the amendments to take place. But, al though it is not usual to refuse leave to amend pleas į yet the defendant will be tied down to a very short time, in which to amend. And where a plea seemed incapable of amendment, the defendant has had leave to withdraw it, and to plead de novo in a fortnight.” Where a plea is clearly good in substance, but is considered as objectionable in point of form, as for not concluding either in bar or otherwise, and for not stating some other necessary things, leave has been given to amend it. § 896. But in the case of answers, and of pleas put in upon oath, the Court will not, for obvious reasons, easily suffer an amendment to be made. In a small matter, however, the defendant may amend; but not in a material one, unless upon evidence to the Court of surprise. The most common case of amending an answer is, where, through inadvertency, the defendant has mistaken a fact, or a date; there, the Court will give leave to amend, to prevent the defendant from being prosecuted for perjury. In general, however, this indulgence is confined to cases of mere mistake or surprise in the answer. 1 Ibid. 7 Mitf. Eq. Pl. by Jeremy, 327, 328. In Smith v. Babcock, 3 Sumner, R. 583, the Court said; "The general rules of Courts of Equity in the amendment of answers are well known. In mere matters of form, or mistakes of dates, or verbal inaccuracies, Courts of Equity are very indulgent in allowing amendments. But when application is made to amend an answer in material facts, or to change essentially the grounds taken in the original answer, Courts of Equity are exceedingly slow and reluctant in acceding to it. To support such applications, they require very cogent circumstances, and such as repel the notion of any attempt of the party |