%**,

CORNELL LAW LIBRARY

(Jornpll IGam i^rlynnl ICtbraty

Cornell University LibraryKF 399.A21 1881

The doctrine of equity.A commentary on t

3 1924 018 798 326

Cornell UniversityLibrary

The original of tiiis book is intine Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions inthe United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924018798326

THE

DOCTRINE OF EQUITY.

COMMBNTAEY ON THE LAWAS ADMINISTERED BY

BY

JOHN ADAMS, Jun., Esq.,BASBISIHR AT LAV

^vtttto gimttiicatt &itim.

CONTAINING THE NOTES TO THE PKEVIOUS EDITIONS BY

J. R. LUDLOW, J. M. COLLINS, HENRY WHARTON, GEO.TUCKER BISPHAM, AND GEORGE SHARSWOOD, Jr.

ADDITIONAL NOTES AND REFERENCES TO RECENT ENGLISH ANDAMERICAN DECISIONS,

ALFRED I. PHILLIPS.

PHILADELPHIA: * *

T. & J. W. JOHNSON & CO.,LAW BOOKSELLERS, PUBLISHERS AND IMPORTERS,

635 CHESTNUT STREET.

188 1.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by

T. 4 J. W. JOHNSON & CO.,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1873, by

T. & J. W. JOHNSON 4 CO.,

In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at "Washington.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1881, by

T. i J. W. JOHNSON & CO.,

In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.

HENRY B. A80MEAD, PRINTER,

Nos. 1102 and 1104 SaQaoiQ Street, PhUadelpbla.

PREFACETO THE SEVENTH AMERICAN EDITION.

In the last edition of this work the notes of the prioreditors were united and combined with their concurrenceand approval, and further notes and references added.This arrangement has been substantially retained in the

present edition, although in some cases it has beendeemed expedient to alter it or re-write the notes. Theadditions made have been interwoven with the formernotes, and consequently no mark has been affixed to dis-tinguish them.

The editor is indebted to Upton H. White, Esq., ofthe Philadelphia bar, for much assistance in the workof revision.

Alfred I. Phillips.Philadelphia, September, 1881.

PREFACE

TO THE THIRD AMERICAN EDITION.

The task of the present editor has been, in the main,

that of supplying notes and references which should

embody the more important English and, American de-cisions, upon the topics of which this work treats, since

the publication of the last edition. He has in some in-

stances, however, enlarged and added to his predecessors'

notes, though leaving them in general to stand as they

were written.

The editor would willingly have made the annotationsto the last division of this work, on Pleading and Prac-

tice, more systematic and complete than they are ; but he

found, that in view of the great changes which time and

altered circumstances have introduced into the course of

Chancery procedure, both in England and the United

States, it would not have been possible to do so withoutadding greatly to the bulk of the book, with no corre-

sponding advantage to the reader. In this country, in-

deed, between those states in which the distinct equitablejurisdiction is abolished, and those in which the frame-work of the Court of Chancery still stands, there is to befound a wide range of diversities, chiefly of local origin,

and irreducible to any common system ; while in none, itis believed, is the older practice, as set forth in the text

of this work, in all respects followed. Every state looksin such matters chiefly to its own statutory and judicialregulations ; and these it would not have been appropriate

PREFACE. V

or convenient to embody in the notes to so elementary awork as the present.

In England, the alterations which the last few yearshave produced, are of the most remarkable character;so that, indeed, the whole structure of Chancery mustbe considered as remodelled. In the first place, thepleadings have been simplified to an extreme degree.An informal claim is substituted in many cases for abUl; and disputed questions under wills, deeds, con-tracts, and the like, may be submitted directly to thecourt in the form of a case stated. The bill, when used,is only a concise printed narrative of the material parts

of the complainant's case, with the prayer for the appro-priate relief at the end ; for the interrogatories are nowfiled separately. The answer is substituted in everyrespect for the old modes of defence ; and is a concisestatement of the respondent's case, whether in bar oravoidance : and he is, in his turn, authorized, if he choose,to exhibit interrogatories to the complainant, and tocompel the production of documents, without recourse toa cross-bill. Exceptions for impertinence on either sideare done away with, the only penalty thereon being thecosts, if any be occasioned. Objections for the non-joinder or misjoinder of parties, where not abolishedaltogether, are made as little productive of injury anddelay as possible. Bills of revivor and supplement nolonger exist : their place being supplied by a greaterlatitude of amendment, and by the power to make cor-responding orders in the cause. The clumsy system ofthe examination of witnesses on interrogatories is abol-

ished; and testimony is now taken oraUy, before theexaminer, in the presence of the parties, as in suits at

law, while objections to the competency of witnesses are

VI PREFACE.

no longer allowed. That fons malorum, the office of

Master, is done away, and its duties are transferred to

the court at chambers, assisted by clerks. The courtnow settles all questions of law, and even a disputed legal

title, itself, without directing an action or a case to a

court of law. A new tribunal, called the Court of Ap-peal, with co-ordinate appellate jurisdiction to the Chan-cellor, has been created. And finally, very judiciousmeans for the reduction of the expenses of Chancery

proceedings have been adopted, the principal one of whichis the substitution of compensation by salaries to theofficers of the court, in lieu of the old fee system. Other

ameliorations and improvements are in progress ; and be-fore long the English Chancery, once the stronghold of

abuses and delay, will be made one of the simplest, mosteffective, and cheapest tribunals in the world. Even

now, the radical, though well-regulated, reforms in this

and other branches of the law, in England, patientlyeffected in the face of a thousand obstacles, present amarked contrast to the slow progress made in this direc-tion by most of the United States. It is to be hoped,indeed, that the subject will soon be taken up by theprofession throughout the whole of our country, withenergy and earnestness, so that we may no longer deservethe reproach of being left behind in the race of real im-provement by one of the most conservative of nations.

The references throughout the book have been care-fully corrected, and an alphabetical table of all the Re-ports and Text-books cited in them, has been prefixed,which will furnish an explanation of the abbreviationsemployed.

Henry Wharton.Philadelphia, April, 1855.

ADVERTISEMENT.

In preparing this treatise for the press, the chief designof its lamented author was to present to the profession acomprehensive and condensed view of the general Princi-ples of the Doctrine of Equity, as administered in theCourt of Chancery, and an outline of the proceedings bywhich those principles are enforced. It comprises thesubstance, with additions, of three series of Lectures, de-livered before the Incorporated Law Society, in the years1842-5. The completion of the work in its present formoccupied from that period a considerable portion of thetime and labor of the author ; and with the exception ofthe last four chapters of the fourth book, the treatise hadreceived his final corrections, and arrangements weremaking for its immediate publication, when he was so sud-denly called away in the autumn of last year.

The thanks of the author's friends are due to Mr. JamesWillis, of the Equity Bar, for his valuable assistance inthe correction of the unfinished chapters of the treatise,

and in the general revision of the work during its progressthrough the press.

J. A.MiCHAGLHAS TeBH, 1849.

CONTENTS.

BOOK I.OF THE JtTRISDICTION OF COURTS OF EQUITY AS REGARDS THEIR

POWER OF ENFORCING DISCOVERT.

CHAPTER I.Of Discovery ....... 1

CHAPTER n.

Of Commissions to examine Witnesses abroad . . 23Of Perpetuation of Testimony

. . . . .24Of Examinations de bene esse .... 25

BOOK II.OP THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF EQUITY IN CASES IN WHICHTHE COURTS OF ORDINARY JURISDICTION CANNOT ENFORCE A RIGHT.

CHAPTER I.

Of Trusts, both Ordinary and Charitable . . .26

CHAPTER II.

Of Specific Performance ..... 77Of Election ....... 92Of Imperfect Consideration..... 97Of Discharge by Matter in pais of Contracts under Seal , 106

CONTENTS.

Of Mortgages.Perfect .

Imperfect

CHAPTEK III.

110

122

Of ConversionOf PrioritiesOf Tacking

CHAPTER IV.135145

163

CHAPTER V.

Of Re-executionOf CorrectionOf Rescission and Cancellation

167169174

CHAPTER VI.

Of JLnjunction against Proceedings at LawOf Bills of Peace . . . ,Of Bills of InterpleaderOf Injunction against Tort .

194199202207

BOOK III.OF THE JUEISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF EQUITY IN OASES IN WHICHTHE COURTS OF ORDINARY JURISDICTION CANNOT ADMINISTER ARIGHT.

CHAPTER I.

Of Account 220

CHAPTER II.

Of PartitionOf Assignment of Dower

229233

CONTENTS. XI

Of Subtraction of Tithes . . . . .235Of Ascertainment of Boundary .... 237

CHAPTER III.

Of Partnership . . . . . . .239

CHAPTER IV.

Of Administration of Testamentary Assets . . . 249

CHAPTER V.

Of Contribution and Exoneration .... 267Of Marshalling 271

CHAPTER VI.

Of Infancy ....... 278Of Idiocy and Lunacy ..... 290

BOOK IV.

OF THE FORMS OF PLEADING AND PROOEDUEB BY WHICH THE JURIS-DICTION OF THE COURTS OP EQUITY IS EXERCISED.

CHAPTER I.

Of the Bill ...... . 299

CHAPTER II.

Of Parties ....... 312

CHAPTER III.

Of Process and Appearance ..... 324

XU CONTENTS.

CHAPTER IV.

Of tlie Defence .,..,. 331CHAPTEE V.

Of Interlocutory Orders...... 348

CHAPTER VI.

Of Evidence ...... 363

CHAPTER VII.

Of the Hearing and Decree ..... 374

CHAPTER Vin.

Of the Rehearing and Appeal .... 396

CHAPTER IX.

Of the Cross-Bill . . . . . .402Of the Bill of Revivor ..... 404Of the Bill of Supplement . . . . .408Of the Bill to Execute or Impeach a Decree . . 415

TABLE OF TEXT-BOOKS AND REPORTS

CITED IN THIS VOLUME.

Abbott's R. (U. S. C. 0.).Adams on Ejectment.Adolphus and Ellis R. (England).Alabama Reports.Allen's R. (Massachusetts).Ambler's R. (England).American Law Journal, New Series.American Law Register.American Law Register, New Series.American Leading Cases (Hare and

Wallace).Arkansas Reports.Ashmead's R. (Pennsylvania).Atkyn's R. (England).Bail Court Cases (England).Bailey's Equity R. (South Carolina).Baldwin's R (Circuit Court, U S.).Barbour's Chancery R. (New York).Barbour's Sup. Ct. R. (New York).Barnewall and Alderson's R. (Eng-

land).Barnewall and Cresswell R. (Eng-

land).Barr's R. (Pennsylvania).Baxter's R. (Tennessee).Bay's R. (South Carolina).Beames on Costs in Equity.Beasley's R. (New Jersey).Beatty's R. (Ireland).Beavan's R. (England).Bennett's R. (Missouri).Bibb's R. (Kentucky).Bingham's New Cases (England).Bingham's R. (England).Binney's R. (Pennsylvania).Blackstone's (Wm.) B. (England).Bland's Chancery R. (Maryland).Black's B. (Sup. Ct. U. S.).Blackford's B. (Indiana).Blatchford's R. (Circuit Ct. U. S.).Bligh's R. (England).Bligh's B., New Series (England).B. Monroe's R. (Kentucky).Bosanquet and Puller's B. (England).Bradford's Surrogate B. (New York).Brewster's R. (Pa ).Brightly's Nisi Prius R. (Pa.).Brockenbrough's R. (Circuit Ct. U.S.).

Browne's Chancery Cases (England).Browne's Parliamentary Cases byTomlins (England).

Burrill on Assignment for the Benefitof Creditors.

Burrough's R. (England).Burr's Trial (U. S.).Busbee's Eq. R. (North Carolina).Bush's R. (Kentucky).Caine's Cases in Error (New York).Calendar of Chancery Proceedings.California Reports.Call's R. (Virginia).Cameron and Norwood's R. (North

Carolina).Carolina Law Repository (North Caro-

lina).Carter's R. (Indiana).Casey's R. (Pennsylvania).Chambers on Infancy.Chancery's Cases (England).Chandler's R. (Wisconsin).Charlton (R. M.) R. (Georgia).Cheves's R. (South Carolina).Clark and Finnelly's R. (England).Clarke's R. (New York).Coke upon Littleton.Coke's Institutes.CoUyer's R. (England).Common Bench R. (England).Comstock's R. (New York).Connecticut Reports.Conner and Lawson's R. (Ireland).Cooke's R. (Tennessee).Cooper's Chancery C^ses (England).Cooper's R. (England).Cooper's (C. P.) R. (England).Cowen's R. (New York).Cowper's R. (England).Cox's Chancery Cases (England).Cox's Chancery Rep. (England).Craig and Phillips's R. (England).Cranch's R. (Sup. Ct. U. S.).Croke's R. (Elizabeth, James I,

Charles I).Curtis's R. (Circuit Ct. U. S.).Cushing's R. (Massachusetts).Cushman's R. (Mississippi).

XIV TEXT-BOOKS AND REPORTS.

Dallas's R. (Pennsylvania).Daly's R. (New York).Dana's R. (Kentucky).Daniell's Chancery Practice.Day's R. (Connecticut).De Gex and Jones's R. (England).De Gex, Fisher and Jones's R. (Eng-

land).De Gex, Jones and Smith's R. (Eng-

land).De Gex and Smale's R. (England).De Gex, Macnaghten and Gordon's R.

(England).Delaware Chancery R.Dessaussure's R. (South Carolina).Devereux's Eq. R. (North Carolina).Devereux and Battle's Equity R.

(North Carolina).Dickin's R. (England).Dillon's R. (0. 0. of IT. S.).Douglass's R. (Michigan).Dow's R. (England).Drewry's R. (England).Drewry and Smale's R. (England).Drury's R. (Ireland).Drury and Warren's R. (Ireland).Dudley's R. (Georgia).Duer's R. (New York).East's R. (England).Eden's R. (England).Edwards's Chancery R. (New York).Edmonds's Select Cases (New York).Elmer's New Jersey Digest.English's R. (Arkansas).English Common Law Report.Equity Draftsman.Equity R. (England).Equity Oases Abridged (England).Exchequer R. (England).Fairfield's R. (Maine).Pinch's R. (England).Florida Reports.Foster's R. (New Hampshire).Freeman's Chancery R. (Mississippi).Freeman's R. (England).Gallison's R. (Circuit Ct. IT. S.).Georgia Decisions.Georgia Reports.Giflfard's R. (England).Gilbert on Uses, by Sugden.Gill and Johnson's R. (Maryland).Gill's R. (Maryland).Oilman's R. (Illinois).Glyn and Jamison's R. (England).Grant's Cases (Pennsylvania).Grattan's R. (Virginia).Gray's R. (Massachusetts).Green's Chancery R. (New Jersey).Greene's R. (Iowa).

Greenleaf's Cruise's Digest.Greenleaf on Evidence.Greenleaf's R. (Maine).Hale's Jurisdiction of the House of

Lords.Hale's Pleas of the Crown.Hall and Twell's R. (England).Halstead's Chancery R. (New Jersey).Hammond's R. (Ohio).Hardin's R. (Kentucky).Hare's R. (England).Hare on Discovery.Hargrave's Coke upon Littleton.Harper's Equity R. (South Carolina).Harper's Law R. (South Carolina).Harrington's Chancery R. (Michigan).Harrington's R. (Delaware).Harris's R. (Pennsylvania).Harris and Gill's R. (Maryland).Harris and Johnson's R. (Maryland).Harris and M'Henry's R. (Maryland).Harrison's R. (New Jersey).Hawk's R. (North Carolina).Haywood's R. (North Carolina).Head's R. (Tennessee).Heiskell's R. (Tennessee).Hemming and^Miller's R. (England).Hempstead's iS. (Circuit Court U. S.).Henning and Munford (Virginia)Heyward's R. (Tennessee).High on Injunctions.Hill's Equity R. (South Carolina).Hill's R. (New York).Hill and Deuio's R. (New York).Hill's Law R. (South Carolina).Hill on Trustees.Hoflfman's Chancery Practice.Hoffman's Chancery R. (New York).Hopkins's R. (New York).House of Lords Cases (England).Howard's R. (Mississippi).HovvarjJ's R. (Supreme Court V. S.).Humphrey's R. (Tennessee).Hun (New York).Illinois Appeal Cases.Illinois Reports.Indiana Reports.Institutes, see Coke.Iowa Reports.Iredell's Equity R. (North Carolina).Irish Chancery R.Irish Equity Reports.Irish Law and Equity R. (New Series).Jacob's R. (England).Jacob and Walker's R. (England).Jarman's Bythewood's Conveyancing.Jarman on Wills.Jarman's Powell on Devises.Johnson's Reports (England).

TEXT-BOOKS AND EEPOKTS. XV

Johnson and Hemming's R. (England).Johnson's Chancery R. (New York).Jones's Equity R. (North Carolina).Jones's R. (PennsylTauia).Jones and Latouche's R. (Ireland).Jurist (England).Kansas Reports.Kay and Johnson's R. (England).Keen's R. (England).Kelly's R. (Georgia).Kent's Commentaries on AmericanLaw.

Kernan's E. (New York).Knapp's Privy Council Cases (Eng-

land).Lansing's R. (N. Y.).Law Journal R., New Series, Chancery

(England).Law Review (England).Law Reports, Chancery Appeals,Chancery Division (England).

Law Reports, Common Pleas (Eng-land).

Law Reports, Equity (England).Lea's R. (Tennessee).Leading Cases in Equity, White and

Tudor, American ed. by Hare andWallace.

Leigh's R. (Virginia).Lewin on Trusts.Littell's R. (Kentucky).Littell's Select Cases, or 6 Litt. (Ken-

tucky).Lloyd and Goold's R. (Ireland).Louisiana Annual R.McCarter's Reports (New Jersey).McCord's Chancery R. (South Car-

olina).McCord's Law R. (South Carolina).McLean's R. (Circuit Court 0. S.).McMuIlen's Chancery R. (South Car-

olina).Macnaghten and Gordon's R. (Eng-

land).Macqueen's Practice.Macqueen's Scottish Appeal Oases

(England).Maddock and Geldart (England).Maddock's Chancery Practice.Maddock's R. (England).Maine Reports.Manning's R. (Michigan).Manning and Granger's R. (England).Marshall's (A. K.) R. (Kentucky).Marshall's (J. J.) R. (Kentucky).Martin and Yerger's R. (Tennessee).Maryland Chancery Decisions.Maryland Reports.Mason's R. (Circuit Court U. S.).

Maule and Selwyn's R. (England).Meeson and Welsby's R. (England).Meigs's R. (Tennessee).Merivale's R. (England).Metcalf s R. (Massachusetts).Metcalfe R. (Kentucky).Michigan Reports.Minnesota Reports.Mississippi Reports.Missouri Appeal Cases.Missouri Reports.Mitford's Chancery Pleadings.Molloy's R. (Ireland).Monroe's R. (Kentucky).Monroe's (Ben.) R. (Kentucky).Montague and Ayrton's Bankruptcy

R. (England).Montague, Deacon and De Gex's E.

(England).Moore's Privy Council Cases (Eng-

land).Mumford's R. (Virginia.Murphey's R. (North Carolina).Mylne and Craig's R. (England).Mylne and Keene's R. (England).Nevada State Reports.New Chancery Cases, see Young and

Collyer.New Hampshire Reports.New York Reports.Norris's R. (Pennsylvania).North Carolina Term Reports.Ohio Reports.Ohio State Reports, New Series.Otto (Supreme Court V. S.).Paige's R. (New York).Paine's R. (Circuit Court U. S.).Parsons on Partnership.Parsons's Equity Cases (Pennsyl-

vania) .Patton and Heath's R. (Virginia).Peck's R. (Tennessee).Peere Williams's R. (England).Pennsylvania Law Journal.Pennsylvania Reports.Pennsylvania State Reports.Penrose and Watts's R. (Pennsyl-

vania).Perry on Trusts.Peters's Circuit Court R. (U. S.).Peters's R. (Supreme Court U. S.).Phillipps on Evidence.Phillips's R. (England).Pickering's R. (Massachusetts).Porter's R. (Alabama).Precedents in Chancery (England).Purdon's Digest (Pennsylvania Stat-

utes).Queen's Bench R. (England).

XVI TEXT-BOOKS AND KEPORTS.

Railway Cases (England).Randolph's R. (Virginia).Rawle's R. (Pennsylvania).Reports, Coke's (England).Rhode Island Reports.Rice's Equity R. (South Carolina).Richardson's Equity R. (South Car-

olina).Riley's Equity R. (South Carolina).Robinson's R. (Virginia).Root's R. (Connecticut).Roper, Husband and Wife, by Jacob.Rotuli Parliamentorum.Russell's R. (England).Eussell and Mylneis R. (England).Sanford's Chancery R. (New York).Sanford's Superior Ot. R. (New York).Saxton's Chancery R. (New Jersey).Scammon's R. (Illinois).Schoales and Lefroy's R. (Ireland).Scott's New Reports (England).Selden's R. (New York).Select Chancery Cases (England).Selwyn's Nisi Prius.Sergeant and Rawle's R. (Pennsyl-

Tania).Seton on Decrees.Shepley's R. (Maine).Shower's Parliamentary Cases (Eng-

land).Siderfin's R. (England).Simons's R. (England).Simons's E., New Series (England).Simons and Stuart's R. (England).Smale and Giffard's R. (England).Smedes and Marshall's Chancery R.

(Mississippi).Smedes and Marshall's R. (Mississippi)

.

Smith's Chancery Practice.Smith's Leading Cases, by Hare andWallace.

Smith's Mercantile Law.Smith, P. F. (PennsylYania R.).Sneed's R. (Tennessee).South Carolina Reports.Speer's Equity R. (South Carolina).Stephen's Blackstone's Commentaries.Stephen on Pleading.Stewart's R. (Alabama).Stewart's R. (New Jersey Eq.).Stewart and Porter's R. (Alabama).Stockton's R. (New Jersey).Story on Equity Jurisprudence.Story on Equity Pleading.Story on Partnership.Story's K. (Circuit Court U. S.).Strange's R. (England).Strobhart's Equity R. (South Car-

olina).

Strobhart's Law R. (South Carolina).Sagden on Powers.Sugden on the Law of Property as

administered in the House of Lords.Sugden on Vendors and Purchasers.Sumner's R. (Circuit Court U. S.).Swan's R. (Tennessee).Swanston's R. (England).Tamlyn's R. (England).Tennessee Chancery R.Tennessee (Overton).Term Reports (England).Texas Reports.Turner's R. (England).Turner and Russell's R. (England).Tyrwhitt's Exch. R. (England).Vermont Reports.Vernon's R. (England).Viner's Abridgment.Virginia Revised Code.Vesey Senior's R. (England).Vesey Junior's R. (England).Vesey and Beames's R. (England).Walker's Chancery R. (Michigan).Walker's R. (Mississippi).Wallace's R. (Supreme Court V. S.).Wallace Jr.'s B. (Circuit Court U. S.).Washington's Circuit Court R. (U. S.).Washington's R. (Virginia).Watts's R. (Pennsylvania).Watts and Sergeant's R. (Pennsyl-

vania).Wendell's R. (New York).West Virginia Reports.Wharton's R. (Pennsylvania). '^Wharton's Digest of Pennsylvania R.Wharton's R. (Supreme Court U. S.).White on Supplement.Wigram on Discovery.Wigram on Wills.William Blackstone's R. (England).Williams on Executors.Williams on Real Property.Williams on Personal Property.Williams's R. (Vermont).Wisconsin Reports.Woodbury and Minot's R. (Circuit

Court V. S.).Wright's R. rOhio).Wright's E. (Pennsylvania).Yeates's R. (Pennsylvania).Yerger's R. (Tennessee).Younge's R. (England).Younge and Collyer, Exchequer R.

(England).Younge and CoUyer's New Chancery

Cases (England).Zabriskie's R. (New Jersey).

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

XVIU TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Att.-Gen. v. Newark, Corporation

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XIX

Bentley v. Bates, . . . 247Bentinck v. Willink, . . 196, 359Benyon v. Cook, . . . 186

V. Nettlefield, . . 20Beresford v. Archbishop of Ar-magh, ..... 46

Beresford v. Driver, ... 14Berkeley v. Rider, . . . 347

V. Standard DiscountCompany, .... 20

Berkhampstead Free School, Exparte, 75

Bernal v. Donegal,. . .361

Bernard v. Drought, . . . 160V. Minshull, . . .31

Berney v. Sewell, . . 122, 353Besant v. Wood, ... 45Besch V. Frolick, . . .243Betts V. Menzies, ... 6Biddulph's and Poole's Trusts, Re, 290Biederman v. Seymour, . . 262Bignold V. Audland, . . 205, 206

V. Springfield, . . 399Bilbie v. Lumley, . . .189Bill V. Cureton, . . 31, 302Binns v. Parr, . . . 351Birch-Wolf v. Birch, . . .228Birkett v. Hibbert, . . .288Birkley ti. Presgrave, . . .271Birley o. Chorlton, . . .212Birmingham v. Kirwan, . . 94Bishop V. Church, . . .172B. J., Re 292Blachford v. Christian, . . 183

V. Kirkpatrick, . . 87Blackburn v. Stables, . . 42

u. Stanlland, . 414V. Warwick, . . 112

Blacket v. Lamb, ... 94Blackeney v. Dufaur, . . . 243Blackie v. Clarke, . . .177Blacklows c. Law, ... 45Blain v. Agar, .... 317Blair v. Bromley, . 173, 174, 177

Re 297Blake v. White, . . . .107Blakemore v. Glamorgan CanalCompany, . . 211, 212, 218

Bland v. Winter, . . .319Blandy v. WiJmore, . . . 105Blacs'des v. Calvert, . . .360Blenkinsopp v. Blenkinsopp, . 180Bligh V. Brent, . . . .245Bloffeld V. Payne, . . .217Blomfield v. Eyre, . . .281Blount V. Hipkins, . . . 265Blundell v. Gladstone, . . 199

V. Winsor, . . 242Blunden v. Desart, . . . 164

Boehm v. Wood, . 354, 360, 361Bolton V. Liverpool, Corporation

of, 15Bond, Ex parte, . . .288

V. Hopkins, . . .228V. Kent, . . . .128

Booth V. Booth,.... 59I). Creswicke, . . 400, 406

Bootle V. Blundell, . 250, 377, 378Bor V. Bor, .... 95Borell V. Dann, ... 79Boschetti v. Power, .Boughton V. James, .

V. Boughton,Boultbee v. Stubbs, .Boulter v. Boulter,Bouverie v. Prentice,Bower v. Cooper,Bowes V. Feme,Bowles V. Orr, ....

V. Weeks,Boys V. Ancell,

.

Boyse v. Colclough, .u. Rossborough,

Bozon v. Farlow,Bradbury v. Manchester, &c., R.R

Brace v. Blick, ....V. Marlborough, Duchess

1593512652631071982387915

22139

108249249

218373

of, . . . 162V. Whenert,

Braddick v. Thompson,Bramwell v. Halcomb,Brandon v. Brandon,

V. Robinson,Braybrooke > . Meredith, .Breadalbane v. Chandos, .Brealey v. Collins,Breeze v. English,Brenan o. Preston,Brice v. Stokes,Bridge, Re,

V. Bridge,Bridges v. Stephens,Bridget v. Hames,Bridgewater, Duke of,Briggs V. Penny,Bright 0. Button,Bristed v. Wilkins,Bristow V. Ward,Broadhurst i\ Balguy,Brocklehurst v. Jessop,Brodie v. Barry,Bromfield, Ex parte, .Bromley v. Smith,Brooke v. Brooke,

V. Hereford, Lord, . 230,V. Greathed, . . 122,Lord V. Rounthwaite,

W.Edwards

59,

164.

83. 193.

215.

3974254

.170

.84

.382

,233

58, 6229H80

. 209, 317

23831

23913393

38212593

14332126323235:^

91

XX TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Brookfield v. Bradley,

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXI

Clapbam n. White, .

XXll TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Gumming, Re, .Curd V. Curd,Curling V. TownshendCurteis v. Wormald,Curtis V. Curtis,Custance v. Bradshaw,Cutler V. Simons,Cutler's Trust, .

. 29315, 382

. 347. 138, 140

234, 235, 336246352

Dagenliam Dock Co., la re.Dale V. Hamilton,D'Almaine v. Boosey,Daniel v. Skipwith,Darby v. Baines,

V. Darby,D'Arcy v. Blake,Darley v. Nicholson,Darthez v. Clemens,Dartmouth v. HoldsworthDaubeny v. Cockburn,Davenport v. Bishopp,

V. Davenport,Davey v. Durrant,Davidson v. Trimmer,Davies v. Davies,

V. Deuby,V. Quarterman

Davis V. Bluck, .V. Cripps,V. Dending,V. Dowding,V. Frowd, .V. Humphreys,V. Johnson,11. Marlborough

28,

12

78

10735, 87

21512023323951

199226

7

18514620812013729711230241611

1121, 285

262269233

Duke of,187, 353

u. Strathmore, . . . 155V. Thomas, . . .111

Dawson v. Paver, . . .212Re, ... . 292V. Jay, . . . .282V. Lawes, . . .268

Day V. Merry, . . . .209Deacon v. Smith, ... 36Dearie v. Hall, . . 53, 56, 16]Dearman v. Wych, . . . 397De Oosta-t). Scandret, . . 179Deeks v. Strutt, . . . .250Deerhurst, Lord, v. St. Albans,Duke of, 42

Deering v. Winchelsea, Earl of,268, 269

Deeth v. Hale, .... 137Delhasse, Ex parte, . . . 239De Manneville v. De Manneville,

281, 283Dent V. Bennett, . . . 185Denton v. Davis, . . . 144Denys v. Locock, . . 338, 340

Denys v. Shruckburgh, . . 191Derby, Earl of, v. Athol, Duke of, 19Derbyshire v. Home, . . 402Desborough v. Harris, . 203De Themmines v. De Donneval, 71, 73De Vaynes v. Morris, . . 407Devon, Duke of, v. Eglin, . . 320Devonshire v. Newenham, . . 315Dietrichseu v. Cabburn, . . 82Dickinson v. Grand Junction

Canal Co.,Dickson v. Gayfere, .Digby, Ex parte.Dikes, Ex parte,Dillon V. Coppin,

0. Parker,Dilly V. Doig,Dimes v. Sleinbnrg, .Dinvriddie v. Bailey, .Dixon V. Muckleston,

V. Wyatt, .Dobson V. Land,Docker v. Somes,Dodd V Lydall,Doddington v Hallett,Doe V. Lewis,

V. Manning, .V. Rolfe,V. Rusham, .V. Jones,

Doloret v. Rothschild,Donaldson o. Beckett,Donovan v. Needham,Dos Santos v. Frietas,Downe v. Morris,Downes v. Grazebrook,Downshire, Marquis of, v. Sandy,Drake t). Drake,

V. Martyn,V. Symes,

Druce v. Denison,Drumraond v. Pigou, 1

Re, .Dryden v. Frost,Dubless V. Flint,Dubost V. Beresford, .

Ex parte,Dugdale v. Dugdale, .Du Hourmelin v. Sheldon,Duke V. Barnett,Duke of Ancaster v. Mayer,Duke of Brunswick v. Duke of

Cambridge, . . . 11, 345Duke of Devon v. Eglin, . . 320Dummer v. Corporation of Chip-penham, .... 4

Dummer v. Pitcher, ... 95Duncan u. Campbell,... 49

V. McCalmont, . . 197

2071362972978096

200248, 353

22112441011864

2232681461461461465283

213103

911361

s, 209401581195

195, 359297HI35121610327513887

263

42,

261

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXUl

Duncuft V. Albrecht, .

XXIV TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Forth V. Norfolk, Duke of,Foss V. Harbottle,Foster v. Alanson,

V. Cockrell,V. Handley,

Foulkes V. Davies,Fourdrin v. Gowdey,Fowler v. Garlike,Fox V. Mackreth,Frampton w.FramptoFreeman v. Baker,

V. Fairlie,V. Lomas,V. Tatham,

Frelland v StansfieldFrere v. Greene,

V. Moore, .Fresh6eld's Trusts, InFrewin v. Lewis,Frowd V. Lawrence,Fuller V. Bennett,

V. Knight,Fulton V. Gilmore,Fyler v. Fyler, .

Gaffee's Trust, .Garcias v. Ricardo,Garden v. Ingram,Gardner ti. Blane,

V. Lachlan,n. Marshall, ,1'. McGutcheon,V. Rowe,

rd,

230

21

Garmstone v. Gaunt,Garrard v. Lauderdale, Lo:Gartside v, Outram,Gaskell v. Gaskell,Gaylor v. Fitzjohn,Gee V. Pritchard,George v. Milbank,Gervis v. Gervis,Gething v. Keighley,Gibbs V. Glamis,

V. Harding,v. Penny,

Gibson v. Bell, .V. D'Este,

Gififard v. Hort, .Gilbee v. Gilbee,Gillespie v. Alexander,Gillett V. Peppercorne,Gilpin V. SouthamptonGingell v. Home,Glasscott V. Lang,Glascott V. Copperminers' Co

9, 20, 314Glassington v. Thwaites,

. 241, 333Glegg V. Rees, . .

. .31

129335240

53, 161254309138336145178

57, 35122321

2432416253

21219815762

34752

44401118284

54, 16149

35728

36028531

399,

176,

3163852161462652273145111223178412291262184259249198

Glendinning, Ex parte,Glengall v. Fraser, - .Gloucester, Corp. of, v. Wood,Glyn V. Duesbury, . .Glynn v. England, Bank of,Goddard, Re,

V. Snow,Goldsraid v. GoldsmidGooch's Case,Goodall V. Little,Goode V. Burton,Goodson V. Ellison, .Goodman v. Sayers,

V. Whitcomb, 241, 243, 354" 33, 138

10712

4012041681171821051466, 7

12659, 318

. 193

384

Gordon v. Atkinson,V. Gordon,V. Graham,Be,V. Simpkinson,

Gore V. Bowser,V. Gibson,

Gosling V. Carter,Goss V. Nugent, LordGoulson V. White,Graham v. Coape,

V. Oliver,Grant v. Grant, .

Be, .i>. Lyman

Gray v. Downman,V. Haig,

Great North of England Junetion Railway . Clarence Bailway, ....

Great Northern R. R. v. ManChester R. R.,

Great Western Colliery Co. vTucker, .

Greedy v. Lavender,.

Green v. Bridges,V. Green,V. Holden,V. Pledgor,V. Weaver,

Greenlaw v. King,Greenough v. Gaskell,Greenway, Ex parte,

.

Greenwood v. Atkinson,u. Evans,V. Taylor,V. Wakeford,

Gregory v. Gregory,V. West,

Gretton v. Haward,. 79

Grey v. Grey,Griffith V. Ricketts,Grimstone, Ex parte,

)'. Gaunt,Grinnell v. Cobbold,

.

179110

li

164.

' 292. 336

6. 183. 25584, 87

, 210. 333

91. 361

38730

173403

218

207

34449106

79, 9211720

616834755

121, 27239, 62

58. 386

96, 97, 235. 102

1, 407, 414. 291

2S5

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXV

Grugeon v. Gerrard, .Gully V, Creg-oe,Gwjdir, Lord, Ex parte,

Habershon v. Blurton,Hale V. Hale,Halford v. Gillow,Hall, Ex parte, .Hall!'. Hinds, Re,

V. Hall,V. Hardy,V. Hill, 102, 103, :V. Jeukinson,V. Laver,

Hallett V. Bousfield, .Halliday's Est., Re, .Halliwell v. Tanner, .Halsey v. Halsey,Hambrook v. Smith, .Hamilton v. Houghton,

V. Hector, .V. Harks, .c. Royse, .V. Watson, .V. Wright, .

Hammond v. Messenger,Hampshire v. Bradley,

V. Wickeus,Hampson !'. Hampson,Hanby v. Robers,Hansard v. Robinson,Hanson v. Keating,Hardini; v. Glyn,Hardniaa v. Ellames,Harday v. Hawkshaw,Hare v. Hale,Hares v. Stringer,Hargrave v. Hargrave,Harlaud u. Binks,

V Emerson, .Harman v. Jones,Harmer v. Gooding, .Harmood v. Oglander,Harries v. Bryant,Harris v. Davison,

V. Harris,Harrison v. Gnrney, .

u. H.eathorn,V. Nettleship.V. Southcote,

Hart V. Alexander,Hartwell v, Ghitters, .Haryey v. Harvey,Hastings, Ex parte, .Hatch V. , .Hawkins, Ex parte, .

V. Hawkins,V. Lawse,

Hayes, Ex parte.

. 165

XXVI TABLE OP ENGLISH CASES.

Hood !). Pimm, . . . .372Hooper u. Brodrick, . . . 218

Ex parte, . . 123, 124Hope V. Hope, .... 24Hopkinsoa v. Lord Burghley, . 15Horlock V. Smith, . . .119Horncastle v. Cbarlesworth,

230, 231, 232Horner's Est., Re,Hoste V. Pratt, .Houghton, Ex parte, .

V, Houghton,Houlditch V. Collins,

.

V. Donegal,Housefield, Ex parte, .Hovenden v, Annesley,How V. BroomsgroTe,

V. Vigues, .Howard v. Digby,

V. Flarris,Howden v. Rogers,Howe V. Dartmouth, LordHowell V. George,Hudson V. Maddison,Hughes V. Eades,

V. Garner,V. Stubbs,V. Wells,

Huguenin v. Basely,Hulme V. Tenant,Hungate v. Gascoyne,Hunt V. Penrice,Hunter v. Atkins,

u. Daniel,Hurst V. Beach, .Hutchinson v. Sheperton,

and TennantHyde v. Whitefield,

.

13628733

245134410123

63, 176, 228200120461123605721

2113723978099

176, 185, 35443, 45, 46

. 417

. 338

. 1855410419231

360

31,

103.

In re,

Ibbetson v. Ibbetson, . . . 265Incorporated Society t>. Richards,

69, 75. 75

2

1011, 14

. 174

. 97

. 165

. 170

. 227

. 71

. 180198, 260

. 360

. 240

. 302. 183

Inge, Ex parte, .Ingilby v. Shafto,Inglessi v. Spartali,Inman v. Whitley,Innes v. Jackson,

V. Ssiyer, .Ireson v. Denn, .Irnham v. Child,Irvin V. Young, .

Jack . Burnett,Jackman v, Mitchell,Jackson v. Leaf,

V. Petrie,V. Stopherd,

Jacob V. Lucas, .Jacobs V. Richards,

Jacques v. Chambers, . . 265Jaques v. Miller, ... 82James v. Dean, .... 60

Ex parte, ... 59Janson v. Solarte, ... 9J. C, Ex parte, . . . .289Jefferys v. JefFerys, ... 78

V. Smith, . 247, 354, 356Jeiferyes w. Parday, . . . 215Jeffs V. Wood, . . . .105Jenkins v. Bryant, . . . 385

V. Bushby, ... 6V. Cross, . . . 412V. Hilles, ... 84V. Parkinson, . 81, 360

Jennings v. Broughton, . .176V. Patterson, . . 258

Jervis v. White, . . 179, 351Jervoise v. Northumberland, Duke

of, . . . 42, 84V. Silk, . . . .287

Jessop V. Watson, . . . 140Jew V. Wood, . . . .205Jodrell V. Jodrell, ... 45Johns V. James, . . .31Johnson v. Child, . . .264

u. Compton, . . . 257V. Curtis, . . .226V. Johnson, . . 48, 90II. Legard, . . 146, 147

Johnston v. Seattle, . 281, 282, 291V. Rowlands,

. .31

Jolland V. Stainbridge,. .

155Jones V. Alephsin, . . . 361

V. Beach, . . . 172, 173V. Gilham,

. . .206

V. Goodrich,. . .

354V. Howells,

. . .415V. Jones, 53, 161, 162, 270u. Kearney,

. . .176V. Lane, .... 174V. Morgan,

. .. 105

V. Mossop,. .

. 2231^. Noy, .... 243V. Pugh, .... 6V. Smith,

. . . 159, 165V. Tanner,

. . . 250John V. Morshead,

. . 230, 231Joy V. Campbell, ... 58Joyce V. De Moleyns,

. . . 162

Kater v. Roget,.

Kay V. Marshall,Keeble, Ex parte,Keeley ". Hooper,Kekewick v. Manning,Kelly V. Hooper,

V. Jackson,Kemble v. Farren,

93, 94218, 340

. 287

. 39353, 55, 80

. 3926

. 108

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXVU

Kemble v. Kean,Kemp V. Pryor, .Kendall, Ex parte,

V. Granger,Kennard v. Kenuard,Kennedy v. Green,

('. Lee,Kennington v. Houghton,Kent V. Burgess,

V. Jackson,Keppell ). Bailey,Kerr v. Corporation of Presto

11. Dungannon, Lord, .V. Rew,V. Wauchope,

Kerricli v. Bransby, .Kettlewell v. Barstow,Keys V. Williams,Kidd I'. Cheyne,Kidnej' v. Cftussmaker,Kilminster v. Pratt, .Kimberly v. Jennings,Kincaid's Trust,King V. Mullin,

V. Daccombe,u. Denison,V. Hamlet, . . 186,V. Smith, .V. Wilson, .

King of Sicilies v. Wilcox,Kirby v. Barton,

V. Marsh, .Klrby Ravensworth Hospital,

parte, ....Kirk V. Eddowes,Kirsvan v. Daniel,KnatchbuU v. Fearnhead, .

V. Grueber,Knight . Boughton,

V. Davis,V. Knight,V. Majoribank:V. Waterford,

Knollys v. Shepherd,Knott V. Cottee,

Ex parte, . 161,Knox V. Gye,

u. Symonds,Kronheim v. Johnson

Lady Thynn t). Earl Glengall, 104,105Lacey, Ex parte.Lake v. Skinner,La Marchant v. La Marchant,Lambert v. Hutchinson,Lancashire v. Lancashire,

.

Lancaster v. Evors, .Re, .

Lanchester v. Thompson, .

82

XXVUl TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Lloyd V. Wait, .V. Williams,

Locke V, Colman, '

Lockhart v. Hardy, . 1Lockwood V. Fenton,Lodge V. Lyseley,London, City of, v. Mitford,

V. Perkins, 200,Long V. Long, . . . ,288,

v. Storie,.

V. Yonge, .Longman v. Winchester,Lord Aldborough v. Tyre,Lord V. Wiglitwick,

.

Lorimer v. Lorimer, .Loscombe v. Russell,Loveday, Ex parte,Lovell V. Galloway, .

V. Hicks,Lovegrove v. Cooper,Low V. Carter,

.

Lowe V. Williams,Lowes V. Lowes,Lowndes v. Cornford,

V. Davies,Lowther v. Lowther,

.

Ludlow, Corporation of, v.house,

Luffldn V. Nunn,Lumley v. Wajner,

.

Lunisden v. Fraser,.

Lund V. Blandshard,.

Lupton V. Whi-te,Lushington v. Boldero,Lyon V. Colville,Lyons v. Blenkiu,

. . 280,Lyre v. Connell,

253,

Green-63

153,

Maber v. Hobbs,. . . 313

McAndrew . Bassett,. 217

McCorquodale v. Bell,. . 1

Macartney v. Graham,. . 168

Macbride v. Lindsay,. . 320

Macclesfield, Earl of, v. Davis, . 02Maccubbin v. Cromwell, . . 58Mackenzie v. Johnston, . . 221

V. Robinson, 118, 120Mackinnon v. Stewart,

. , 31Mackreth t). Symmons, .. 128,129Macloud i). Annesley,

. .318Macnamara v. Maquire, 198, 359Magdalen Coll. p. Att.-Gen., . 69Maitland v. Bateman,

. . 56Malcolm v. Scott, . . 54, 413Maiden v. Fyson,

. . 80, 392Malens v. Freeman, ... 85Man V. Ricketts,

. . 250, 410Mandeuo v. Mandeno,

. . 394Manser v. Jenner,

. . 356, 357

37649

37726428214989

20128932032121518646

232241293

2

2992562571294

2019

83

,76

312207423211222316255283206

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXIX

Millington v. Fox,Mills V. Farmer,

V. Mills, .Milner o. Harewood, .Milnes v. Davison,Minet v. MorganMirehouse v. Scaife, .Mitchell V. Hayne,Mitford V. Reynolds, .Moggridge v. Tliackwell,Mole V. Mansfield,Molton V. Camroux, .Mondey v. Mondey, .Money v. Jordan,Monro v. Taylor,Monteith v. Taylor, .,Montfort, Lord, v. CadoganMoodie v. Bannister, .Moons V. De Bernales,Moore v. Crofton,

f. Frowd,V. Marrable,V. Prior, .V. Usher, .

Moores v. Choat,Morgan v. Annis, ' .Morgan, Ex parte,

V. Goode,V, JIallson,

.

V. Shaw,Morley v. Bridges,Morrett v. Paske,Morice w. Durham, Bishop

V. Langham, .V. Swabey,

Morrison v. Moat,Morrell v. Wooten,Morris v. Bethell,

V. McNeil,V. Morgan,V. Morris,

Morrison v. Arnold, .Mortimer v. Fraser, .

V. Shortall,Mortlock V. BuUer,Moss V. Baldock,Mossop V. Eadon,Mostyn v. Spencer,Motley V. Downman, .Mozley v. Alston,Muckleston v. Brown,Muddle V. Fry, .Mullock V. Jenkins, .Munch V. Cockerell, .Mundy v. Joliffe,

u. Mundy,Munoz V. De Tastet, .Murless v. Franklin, .Murray v. Barlee,

289,

217, 392, 3937157

,413217

. 275

. 205

. 6771, 73. 231. 183

121, 385196, 356

Lord,

60

125

of.

163

40955

314376776182

26020514224837635628

35211116567

37614

21615

. 360

. 3342525

. 335

. 17155, 81. 396. 168

368, 370. 217. 321

33. 376. 320

317, 318. 87. 234. 322. 102

46

Murray ti. Elibank,V. Glass,II. Shadwell,"V. Vipart,V. Walter,

Mutter V. Chanwell,

48, 4928

36432415

413

12967

222189, 190

. 189

262.

' 35181, 413

. 383. 290, 291

84, 91, 177, 31582

292140172269

Nairn v. Frowse,Nash V. Morley, .Navulshaw v. Brownrigg.Naylor v. Winch,Neale v. Neale, .Neate v. Marlborough, Duke of,

130,Nedby v. Nedby,Nelson v. Bridges,

V. BridportV. Duncombe,

Nelthrope v. HolgateNesbit V Meyer,

Re, .Newberry, In re,Newburgh v. Newburgh, .Newby v. Reed,

. ...

Newcastle, Duke of, v. Lincoln,Countess of, . . . .42

Newcomb . Bonham,. . 112

Newlands o. Paynter,. . 149

Newton v. Hunt,. . . 187

Nichols V. Chalie,. . . 193

V. Roe, .... 193NichoUs V. Maynard, . . . 109Nicholson v. Hooper,

. . 150V. Wordsworth,

. 38Nightingale v. Goulborn,

. . 67Nokes V. Seppings,

. . . 350Norcutt V. Dodd,

. ; 147, 148Norris v. Wilkinson,

. . . 125Northam Bridge Company v.Southampton Railway Com-pany, .... 376, 377

Norway t). Rowe, . . .11Nunn V. Harvey, . . . 286Nurse v. Lord Seymour,

. . 85Nutbrown v. Thornton,

. . 83

O'Connor v. Spaight,. . 224

Odessa Tramways Co. w. Mendell, 83Oglander v. Oglander,

. . 39Okill V. Whittaker,

. . 170, 172Oldham v. Eboral,

. . . 415Oliver V. Richardson,

. . 235Omerod v. Hardman, ... 84Omohundo v. Henson,

. . 317Omrod u. Huth, . . . .178Onslow i;. Wallis, . . 32, 50Ord V. Noel, .... 55

V. White, .... 356Orr V. Draper, .... 20

XXK TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Orrell v. Orrell, .Osborne v. Harvey,

.

Ostell V. Le Page,Otyey V. Pensara,Overton v. Bannister,Ovpen V. Howman,Owens V. Dickinson, .Oxendon v. Compton, Lord,

143,Oxford V. Rodney,

Padbury v. Clark,Padwick v. Hurst,

V. Stanley,Page V. Cox,

Re, . .Pain V. Smith, .Palin V. Hathercote,Palmer v. Neave,Parker v. Fairlie,

0. Housefield,Parke's Charity, In re,Parkhurst v. Lowton,Parkin v. Thorold,Parnall v Parnall,Parr v. Attorney-General,Parrott v. Svveetland,Partridge v. Usborne,Pastey v. Freeman,Paterson v. Scott, . 263Pauli V. Von Melle,Paxton V. Douglass,Peace v. Hains, .Peachy v. Somerset,Peacock v. Burt,

t. Evans,V. Peacock,

Peake v. Highfield,Pearce v. Loman,Pearne v. Lisle, .Pearse, Ex parte,

V. Green,V. Hewitt,V. Pearse,

Pearson, Re,Pedley v. Goddard,Pegg V. Wisden,Pelham v. Hinder,Pemberton v. Pemberton,Penfold V. Nunn,Pennell v. DefFell,Penney v. Avison,Penny v. Goode,

V. Turner,V. Watts,

Perkin v. Staiford,Perkins v. Bradley,Perry v. Barker,

V. Phelips,. 36,

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXXI

Pritchard v. Fleetwood,Pritt V. Clay,Proby V. Landor,Prodgers v. Langham,Prosser v. Edmonds, .Prowse V. Abingdon, .Pruen v. Lunn,Pulsford V. Richards,Pulteney v. Darlington,

V. Warren, .Pulrertoft v. Pulvertoft,Puree! v. McNamara, .Pusey V. Desbouvrie,Pye, Ex parte, .Pym V. Lockyer,Pyrke v. Waddingham,

Quarrell v. Beckford,.

Queen's College, In re.

. 353

. 18931, 99. 146

54. 276. 406

176, 177. 137

229, 234, 235146, 153

. 38696

80, 98, 10498, 104

84

. 119

. 75

Rabbett v. Squire, . . . 343Radcliffe, Ex parte,

. . 293Raine v. Cairns, . . . 236Rajah, &c., v. E. I. Co.,Ramsbottom v. Freeman, . . 3B5Randall v. Randall, . . . 245

u. Russell, ... 60Ranger v. Great Western Railway,

222, 224Ranken v. Harwood, . . . 260

V. Huskisson, . . 218Raphael v. Boehm, ... 64Raven v. Waite,.... 103Rawson v. Samuel, . . 223, 358Rawstone v. Parr, . .173Raynes v. Wyse, . . . 360Reade v. Woodruffe, ... 10Reece v. Trye, .... 91Reed v. Harris, . ... . 353Rees V. Berrington, . 106, 268, 269

V. Keith, . . . .142Reeve v. Attorney-General, . 73Reeves v. Baker, . 29, 31, 306

V. Glastonbury CanalCompany, . .113

Reg. V. Smith, . . . .282Reid V. Langlois, ... 7

V. Shergold, . . .100Rendall v. Rendall, . . .353Rennie v. Ritchie, ... 44Republic of Peru v. Weguelin, 8, 314Rex V. Canterbury, Bishop of, . 75

V. Greenhill,

xxxu TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Ruffin, Ex parte,

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXXlll

Smith . Smith,

XXXIV TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Thompson, Ex parte,

TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES. XXXV

Walwyn v. Lee, .

XXXVl TABLE OF ENGLISH CASES.

Wilson V. Coles,Ex parte,V. Metcalf,V. Moore,V. Northampton E. R.V. Stanhope, .V. Thornbury,V. Wilson,

Wilton V. Hill, .Wiltshire v. Rabbits,Winch V. Birkinhead R. R.,Winchester t). Bowker,Winter v. Anson,

V. Innes, .Withy V. Cottle,Witter V. Witter,Witty V. Marshall,Wood V. Abrey, .

V. Downes,V. Griffith,V. Hitchings,V. Milner,V. Rowcliffe,

Woodgate v. Field,Woodhouse v. Shepley,Woodmason v. Doyne,Woodruffe v. Daniel, .Woodward v. Millar, .Woodyatt v. Gresley,Woolam V. Hearne,Wormald v. De Lisle,Worrall v. Jacob,

TABLE OF CASES

CITED IN THE AMERICAN NOTES.

XXXVUl CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Anderson v. Hughes,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. XXXIX

Bainbriclge v. Owen, .

xl CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Beaty v. Beaty,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. xli

Black V. Black, .

xlii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

&c,

E. R

Brace v. Wehnert,Bracken v. Hambrick,

V. Kennedy, .V. Miller,

Brackenridge v. Holland,Bradberry v. Keas,

V. Manchester,R. R. Co.,

V. White, .Bradford o. Forbes, .

V. Geiss,V. Greenway,V. Kents,V. Romney,V. Union Bank,

Bradley v. Chase,V. Chester Valley

Co., .

V. Root,Br'adsher v. Lee,Brady's Appeal,Brady v. Cabitt,

V. McCosker, .V. Waldron,V. Weeks,

Bragg V. Massie's Ex'rs,V. Paulk, .

Brailey v. Sugg,Brandon v. Brandon,Brandt v. Mickle,Brant's Will,Brashear 4). Macey,Brasher v. Van Cortlandt,Brashier v. Gratz,Braxton t. Coleman, .Brazee and Others v. Lancaster

8386

240157

57, 61174

21785

26134446

94, 9616885

392

12136421177

106249

114, 20821111128

2693974526320829788

233

Bank

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. xliii

Brown v. Dysinger,V. Gilliland,V. Hafif, .

V. HigginbothV. James,V. Jones,V. Kfelsev,V. Kennedy,V. Lamphear,V. McDonald,V. Nickle,V. Peck, .V. Ray, .V. Ricketts,V. Simons,V. Simpson,u. SouthiworthV. Speyers,V. Stewart,V. Swann,V. Vandegrift,V. Van Dyke,V. Vanlier,V. Winans,V. Wood,V. Worcester Bank

Brown's Case, .Browne, Re,Brownell v. Curtis et alBrnbaker v. OkfesonBruce v, Burd'et,

v. Edwards,V. Smith, .

Bruch V. Lantz, .Bruen v. Bruen, .

V. Crane, .V. Hone, .

Bruin v. Knott, .Brumagin v. Chew,Brunswick (Duke of)

Cambridge,Brush V. Vanderbergh

V. Ware,Bruton v. Rutland,Bryan v. BIythe,

V. Hickson,Bryant v. Crosby,Bryant's Ex'rs v. Boothe.Bryson v. Peak, .Buchan . Sumner,Buchanan v. Matlock,Buck V. Hair,

V. Holloway,V. Pike,V. Smith, .V. Spofford,V. Swazey,!). Winn, .

Buckles V. Lafferty,

xliv CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Burt V. Bowles, ,V. Cassedy,V. Herron, .V. Wilson, .

Burton v. Black,V. Goodspeed,V. Rutland,V. Wiley,

Burtus V. Tisdall,Burw'ell v. Cawood,

V. Mandeville,Busbee v. Littlefield,Bush V. Bush,

v. Cooper, .. Golden, .V. Sherman,V. Stamps,V. Vandenberg,

Butler V. Ardis, .V. Burkey,V. Catling,V. Durham,u. Elliott,V. Haskell,V. Hicks,V. O'Hear,V. Spann,V. Stevens,V. Viele, .

Butts V. Genung,Buxton V. Broadway,Bybee v. Tharp,Byers v. Clanahan,

Cabeen v. Gordon,Cadbury v. Duval, . 147,Cadwalader v. Montgomery,Cadwalader's Appeal,CadytJ. Potter, .Caffey v. McMichael, .Cain V, Warford,Calder v. Chapman, .Caldecott v. GrifBth, .Caldwell a. Blackwood,

11. Knott,V. Stileman,V. Taggart, .V. Van Vlissengen,i>. Williams,

Calkins v. Evans,Callan v. Watliam,Calloway v. People's Bank,

V. WitherspoonGalium V. Emanuel,Calvin v. Wiggam,Calvit V. Markham,Calwell V. Boyer,Camblatt v. Tapery,Camden R. R. v. Stewart,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. xlv

Carr v. Wallace,

xlvi CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Christ's Hospital v. Grainger, 67Christy v. Barnhart, ... 86Chubb V. Peckham, . . . 11Church V. Eutland, . . .248

V. Sterling, ... 33Churcher v. Guernsey, . . 151Churchill's Heirs v. Aiken's Adm'rs, 61City Bank v. Bangs, . . . 203

Council V. Page, 151, 15V, 224of Philadelphia's Appeal, . 363of Phila. V. Davis, 94, 95, 97

V. Girard's Heirs, 69of Rochester t). Curtiss, . 211

Clabaugh v. Byerly, .Clack V. Carlon,Clagett V. Hall,Glamorgan v. Guisse,Clancy v. Craine,Clanricarde v. Henning,Clapp V. Ingrabamj

V. Thaxton,V. Rice,

Clark's Appeal, .u. Beach, .V. Bundy,V. Burnham,V. Condet,

168,

V. Davis,V. Finlon,V. Franklin,V. Garfield,i.~Hackett,I/. Hart,". Henry, .V. Henshaw,V. Hilton,V. Long,V. Malpas,V. Phelps,V. Reed,o. Saginaw Bank,V. White,V. Wilson,

Clark's Adm'r v. Van Reimsdyk,Appeal,

Clarke v. Clayton,V. Franklin,V. Gilbert,V. Reins,Re,

Clarkson v. De Peyster,V. Morgan, .

Clason V. Horris,Claussen v. La Franz,Clay V. Wren,Clayton v. Bussey,

V. Frazier,V. Freet,

V. lUingsworth,

15061

. 350

. 310

. 334

. 184

. 100

. 416

. 209

. 239

. 2562333

. 112

. 335111, 118

. 14056

. 363

. 168

. Ill

. 26333

. 31218333539233921124136320823113923977

286302157269331171088016883

21,

Clayton v. Mitchell, . . .360V. Thompson, . . 363

Clayton's Case, . . . .221Clearley v. Babcock, . . . 168Cleghorn v. Insurance Bank ofColumbus, . . . .243

Cleland v. Gray, . . .399Clements v. Bowes, . . . 319

V. Moore, . . . 363Clery's Appeal, .... 263Cleveland v. Cit. Gas Co., . . 211Clifton V. Davis, . . .187

V. Livor, . . . 197Climer v. Hovey, ... 85Clinch V. Financial Corporation; 12Clive V. Carew, .... 363Cloud V. Whitman, . . . 309Clowes V. Beck, . . . .393Clute V. Potter, . . . .198Coari v. Olsen, .... 151Coast Line Co. v. Cohen, . . 211Coats V. Robinson, ... 46Cochran v. Risou, . . . 418Cochrane v. Willis, . . . 188Cocke V. Evans, . . 310, 399

V. Phillips, . . .233V. Trotter, . . .363

Cockell V. Taylor, . . .174Cockrell v. Warner, . . . 402Cockerill v. Armstrong,

.. 233

Cocron v. Middleton, . . . 315Coder V. Huling, ... 33Coe V. Turner 310

V. Winnipiseogee Manuf. Co., 211

61Coffee V. Newsom,

u. Ruffin, .CofRng V. Taylor,Cogswell V. Cogswell,Coil V. Pittsburgh College,Coker v. Shropshire,

V. Whitlock,Colby V. Kenniston,Colclough V. Boyse,Cole Co. 0. Anghey,

V. Lake Co.,Coleman v. Barnes,

V. Gage,V. Mellersh,V. Rose,V. Wooley,

Coleman's Case,Appeal,

Coles and Others, Ex'rs v. Browne,V. Coles, .... 389V. Sims, .... 152

Collett V. Morrison,. . . 160

Collingwood v. Row,. . . 141

Collins V. Archer,. . . 162

v. Carlisle,. . 30, 31

35617416826117727220815324933631731035622636346

29090, 309

157

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. xlvii

Collins V. Champ's Heirs, .

xlviii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Covell V. Doloff,Covenhoven (Case of),Coventry v. Chichester,Cowden v. Cowden, .Cowden's Estate,Cowdin V. Cram,Cowles V. Buchanan, .

V. Brown,V. Carter,V. Marble,V. Whitman, .

Cowls V. Cowls, .Cowman v Hall,

V. Kingsland,Cox V. Corkendall,

t>. Coventon,V. Cox,V. Hickman,u. McMullen,V. Mayor of Griffin,V. Peters,V. Scott,V. Williamson,V. Wood,

Craddock i). Cabiness,Cradock v. O-wen,

V Piper,Craft V. Lathrop,Craig V. Kitbridge,

V. Leslie, 33,42, 136,V. Tappin,

Craighead v. Wilson,Craik v. Clark, .Cralle v. Meen, .Cram v. Green, .Crandall v. Hoysradt,

V. Bacon,Crane v. Burntrager, .

K. Conklin,V. DeCamp,

Crapster v. Griffith, .Crawford v. Summers,Crawley v. Poole,

V. Timberlake,Creager v. Brengle,Creaser v. Robinson, .Creath v. Smith,Creed v. Lancaster Bank,Cregar v. Creamer,Crenshaw v. Anthony,Cresson's Appeal,Crest V. Jack,Crews V. Burcham, :

V. Threadgill, .Cribbins v. Markwood,Crim V. Handley,Crittenden v. Brainard,Crocheron v. Jaques,

.

Crocker v. Crocker, .

. 114

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. xlix

Dabbs V. Dabbs,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Dennison v. Goehring, 33

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Draper v. Gordon, . 11, 402

lii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Eirichs v. De Mill,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. liii

Fausler v. Jones,

liv CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Frazier v. Prazier,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Iv

Gentry v. Rogers,

Ivi CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Graham v. Lambert, .

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES, Ivii

Haines v. Ellis, .

Iviii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Hart V. Coffee, . . . .319V. Farmers' Bank, . . 54u. Freeman, . . 20, 21V. Hart, .... 86V. Hawkins, . . . 246u. Kelly, . . . .239D. Mayor of Albany, . 210,211V. McKeen, . . .310V. Ten Eyck, . . 51, 3T9

Hartshorne v. Cuttrell, . . 193V. Hartshorne, .

Harvard College v. Soc. for pro-moting Theological Education,

Harvey v. Alexander,V. Foley,

Harwood v. Kirby,Haskell v. Haskell,Hassam v. Day,Hassanclever v. Tucker,Hassard v. Rowe,Hassel v. Hawkins,Easting's Case,Hatcher v. Hatcher,Hathaway v. Foy,

V. Noble,Hattier v. Etinaud,Hatton V. Weems,Hatz's Appeal,Haughty v. Strang,Haughwout V. Murphy,Hauser v. Shore,Havens v. Havens,

V. Hussey,V. Sackett,

Haverstick v. Sipe,Havrell v. Ellsworth,Hawkes v. Hubback,Hawkins v. Clermont,

V. Hawkins,V. King,

Hawley v. Clowes,V. Cramer,V. James,

,

32, 51, 61, 136, 138, 233

263

86,

233

313364268230

92302742851052'72

27020217719261

11219812815694

24194

21021144

335364110

208, 210151, 312

V. Manciusu. Sheldon,V. Wolvertou

Hawralty v. Warren,Hay V. Lewis,

V. Marshall,Haydon v. Goode,Hayes v. Heyer,

V. Johnson,f. Ward,

Hayues v. Forshaw,V. Kershow,

Hays, Ex parte,u. Hall, .V. Heidelburg,

61, 272. 82. 30682, 16878, 79

220, 22227535620326825178

2868195

Hays V. Jackson,V. Thode, .V. Wood, .

Hayward v. Carroll,V. Purssey,

Haywood v. Cope,V. Hutchins,V. Jndson,

Hazen v. Thurber et alHazlett V. Powell,Head v, Muir,Headley v. Goundry, .Heard,, Ex parte.Heath v. Waters,Hebburn v. Snyder, .Heckard v. Sayre,Hedges v. Riker,Hedrick v. Hearn,Heeney, Matter of.Heirs of Holman v. Bank of

folk.Heist V. Baker, . ,Hellen v. Crawford, .Heller, Matter of,Helling v. Lambey,Helm V. Darby,Helms V. Franciscus, .Hemiup, Matter of.Hemming v. Swinnerton,Hemstreet v. Burdick,Henderson v. Ardery,

V. Burton,u. Dennison,u. Dickey,

V. Lowry,Hendricks v. Robinson,Hendrickson v. Hinckley,Hendrix v. Money,Henn v. Walsh,Hennessy v. Andrews,Hennesy v. Walsh,Henricks v. Robinson,Henry v. Compton,

V. Henry,V. Liles,V. Morgan,

Henshaw v. Wells,Hensman v. Fryer,Hepburn v. Auld,

V. Carts,V. Dunlop,

Herbach v. Gray,Herbert v. Wren,Herr v. Bierbower,Herrick v. Blair,Herron v. Williamson,Hertell v. Bogert,Hester v. Wilkinson,

263,

Nor-

261, 385,

128,

84,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. lix

Heth V. Cocke, . . . 233Hetlierington v. Clarke,

. .151Hewett V. Loosemoor, . . 150

V. Sturdevant,. 241, 268

Hewitt V. Adams, . . . 346Hewlett V. Hewlett, . . .198Heyward v. Cuthbert, . . 287Hlckling . Boyer, . . . 261Hickman v. Cooke, . . . 310

V. McCurdy, . . 268I. Perrin, . . .153V. Stout, . 220, 222, 303

Hickox t). Lowe, . . . IllHidden v. Jordan,

. . . 118Hiester v. Green, . . .128

V. Madeira, . . .111Higbee v. Camden, &o., Co., . 211Higdon V. Heard, ... 3Biggins V. Joice, . . . 179

.

c. Woodward, . 196, 356Higginson v. Hall, ... 8Higt V. Worley,

. . .137Hightower v. Mustain,

. . 314V. Smith, . . 392

Higinbotham v. Burnet, . . 335Hilar v. Darly's Adm'rs, . . 254Hill V. Beach, . . . .443

t. Bowyer, . . . 399V. Campbell, ... 3V. Commissioners, . . 320V. Epley, .... 150V. Grigsby, . . . .128V. Harris, .... 197V. Lackey, .... 167V. McLaurin, . . . 183V. Ressegieu, . . .81V. Rockingham Bank, 80, 83V. United States, . 194

Hilleary u. Hurdle, . . .309Hillyard v. Miller, ... 43Hilton V. Duncan, ... 86Hinchman v. Patterson, . . 210

V. Richie, ' . 290, 292Hindson v. Wetherill, 61, 184, 248Hine v. Dodd, . . . .153

V. Handy 194V. Hine, . . . .105V. Stephens, . . . 196

Hines v. Keller, . . . .269V. Spruill, . . 254, 255

Hinkle v. Currin, ... 19Hinsdil V. Murray, . . . 269Hinson v. Pickett, . . .399

V. Partee, . . IllHinton v. Cole 309Hitch V. Davis, . . . .309

I. Fenby, . . 397, 417, 419Hitchcock V. Harrington, . . 114

V. St. John, . . 241

Hitchcock V. Skinner, . 230, 233Hite V. Hite 103Hitner's Appeal, ... 45Hittv. Holiday, . . . .113

u. Ormsbee, . . . 363Hobart v. Prisbie, . . .303Hobbs V. Parker, . . .177Hobday t). Peters, . . .176Hockenbury v. Carlisle, . . 184Hocker v. Gentry, . . .136Hoday v. Hound, . . .167Hodges V. MuUikin, . . . 364

V. N. E. Screw Co., . 397Hoen V. Simmons, ... 82Hoes V. Van Hoesen, . . 261, 263Hoflf's Appeal, . ' . . .261Hoffman v. Livingstone . 196, 356

V. Postil, . 8, 308, 344V. Savage, . . . 231V. Smith, . . .376V. Wilding, . . . 263

Hogan V. Jacques, ... 33Hoge V. Hoge, .... 248Hoitt V. Webb, .... 61Holden v. McMakin, . . 243, 246

V. Pike, . . . .270Holderstaffe v. Saunders, . . 194ffoldin V. Durbin, ... 39Holgate V. Palmer, . . . 364HoUiday v. Riordan, . . . 336Hollister v. Barkley, . 196, 356, 379HoUsclaw V. Johnson, . . 335Holme V. Hammond, . . . 239Holmes v. George, . . . 196

V. Hawes, . . . 243V. Holmes, . 20, 21, 230V. Logan, . . . 286V. Marshall, . . . 147

Holridge v. Gillespie, . .113Holroyd v. Marshall, . . 54, 110Holsman v. The Boiling Spring

Co., .... 199, 211Hglt . Bank of Augusta, . . 356

V. Robertson, . . . 268Holton V. Meighen, . . .11.1Holyoke v. Mayo, . . . 240Home Ins. Co. v. Lewis, . . 169Homer v. Hanks, . . . 402

V. Perkins, . . . 177Honeywood v. Forster,Honore v. Colmesnil,

.

Hood V. Bowman,V. Fahnestock, ;V. Inman,V. James, .V. N. Y. & N. H. Railroad

Co., .V. Oglander,

Hook V. Stone, .

24486

157306121

19831

241

Ix CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Hooker v. Pynchon,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixi

^untoa V. Piatt,

Ixii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Jerome v. McCarter,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixiii

Kennedy v. Creswell,

Ixiv CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Kyner v. Kyner,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixv

Lenox v. Notrobe,51, 61, 233, 281, 352, 363

Leonard v. Barnum, . . . 183V. Putnam, . . . 282

Le Roy v. Servis, . . . 334V. Veeder, . . . 335

Lesley v. Johnson, , . . 150V. Eosson, . . . 222

Lessig V. Langton, . . . 356Lester v. Lester, ... 86Letcher v. Letcher, ... 33

V. Shroeder, . . . 312Lever v. Lever,' . . . 221Levert v. Redwood, . . . 379Lererton v. Waters, . . . 230Lewis V. Bacon,

. . 255V. Baird, . . .153u. Darling, . . . 263V. Hilman, . . .61V. Leak, . . . 356V. Lewis, ... 97V. McLemore, . . . 177V. Matthews, ... 45V. Mew, . . . 157V. Moorman, . . . 233V. Nobbs, ... 57V. Palmer, . . . 269V. Robards, . . .111V. St. Albans Steel Co., . 309

Liddard v. Liddard, ... 31Lies V. Stub, . . . .189Lightner v. Mooney, . . . 153Ligon's Adm'r v. Rogers, . .168Lilford V. Powya, . . .275Lillard v. Turner, ... 46Lilly V. Kroesen, . . .227Lincoln !). Rutland, &c., R. R. Co. 203Lindsay v. Etheridge, . 196, 356

V. Harrison, . . 44u. Pleasants, . 33, 138V. Rankin, . . 151

Lindsley v. James, . . 20, 21Lines v. Darden; ... 29Linford v. Linford, . . .243Lingan v. Henderson,

23, 128, 303, 304, 309, 364Lining v. Geddes,Linker v. Smith,Linkhouse v. Cooper,Lippincott v. Mitchell,

V. Stokes,Lister v. Hodgson,Litchfield v. Ready,Little V. Marsh, .

V. Price, .Littlefield v. Tinsley, ,Lirermore v. Aldrich,Livingston v. Clarkson,

V. Harris,

210. 180. 84. 45. 100. 168. 114

196, 356. 198

84. 33. 231. 334

Livingston v. Hubbs,

Ixvi CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Lowell's Appeal,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixvii

McGinnis's Appeal, . . . 2T2MoGlothliu V. Hemery, . . 309McGowen d. Remington, . 83, 91McGrew v. Tombeckbee Bank, . 198McGuire v. McGowan, . . 33

V. O'Hallorau, . . 192McHenry v. Cooper, . . . 113

V. Hazard, . 175, 200, 205McHurdy v. McHurdy, . . 254Mclntire v. Hughes, ... 78

School ti. Zan. Canal Co., 37Mcintosh V. Alexander, . 309, 310Mclntyre v. Trustees of Union

College, 303, 309, 344V. Zanesville, . . 56

McJilton V. Love, . . . 198McKasson's App., ... 43McKay v. Corrington,

u. Green, . . .258McKeen v. Field, . . .345McKelvey v. Truby, . . . 150McKennan v. Phillips, . 37, 45McKibbin v. Brown, ... 77McKim V. Handy, . . .391

V. Mason, . . . 399V. Odom, . . .221V. White Hall Co., 107, 344,

347McKin V. 'Williams, .McKinley v. Irwine, .McKinney v. Miller, .

i;. Pierce, .McKinnie v. Rutherford,McKinstry v. Conly, .McKissick v. Pickle, .McLane v. Johnson, .

V. Manning, .McLard v. Linnville, .McLaren v. Stainton,

V. Steapp, .McLaurin v. Wright, .McLean v. Fleming, .McLellan v. Longfellow,McLenahan v. McLenahauMcLeod V. Drummond,McLin V. McNamara, .McLoud V. Roberts, .McLoughlin v. Sheppard,McMahon v. Fawcett,McMakeu v. McMaken,McManus v. The State,McMechan v. GriflBng,McMorris v. Crawford,McMurtrie v. Bennett,McNair v. Picott,McNamara v. Dwyer, .McNaughten v. Partridge,McNear v. Bailey,McNeil V. Magee,

77,

31727028031711167147176363198221111217

7

261351222263111269314

7

15381

82, 86110360240192192

128

McNeil V. McNeil,V. Norsworthy,

McNitt V. Logan,MoNutt V. Strayhorn,McPherson v. Talbott,McPike V. Wells,McQueen v. McQueen,McRae v. McKeuzie, .McRaven v. Maguire, .McRees's Adm. v. Means,MeWhorter v. McMahon,McWilliams v. Herndon,MacBride v. Lindsay, .Maccubbin v. Cromwell, 28MacDonough v. Gaynor,MacDougald v. Maddox,Mack V. Wetzlar,Mackey v. Stafford,Mackinnon v. Stewart,Mackreth v. Symmons,Macleod v. Annesley,llaclin V. Smith,Macon, &c., R. R. Co. v. Parker.Macsh V. Davison,Mactier v. Lawrence, .llacy V. Childers,Maddox'!). Dent,

V. Rowe,V. Simmons, .

Madiera v. Hopkins, .Magdalen College v. Att.-GMagee v. Magee,Magill V. Brown,Magniac v. Thompson,Magoffin v. Holt,Magwood V. Johnston,Slahan v. Mahan,Mahana o. Blunt,Maher v. Bull,Mahone v. Central Bank,

V. Williams, .Mahorner v. Harrison,Malin v. Malin,Malins v. Brown,Mallory v. Mallory,Mallow V. Hinde,Malmesbury v. MalmesburyMalzy V. Edge, .Mamlock v. Fairbanks,Manchester v. Dey,Mandeno v. Mandeno,Mandeville v. Riggs, .Manes v. Durant,Manhattan Gas Co. u. Barker,Mann v. Betterley,

V. Butler, .V. Higgins,

Manners v. Manners, ,Manning v. Drake,

25711115124326932396

2411533184

346319

37,58,30836019

1146131

129318286197

325930335077

18377693366

30388467886

309196, 356

11833

33, 3178633

32316837177

196, 35639432118019618332124323020

Ixviii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Manning v. Laboree, .V. Manning,

Mann's Ex'rs v. Falcon,Mansell's Estate,Mantz V. Bnciianan, .Many v. Beekman Iron Co 303

103

110,

309

Mapps V. Siiarpe,Marberger v. Pott,Marble Co. v. Ripley,Marburry v. Madison,March v. Berrier,

V. Davidson,i). Ludlam,u. Thompson, .

Margaret v. Conestogo,Marine Bank v. Fulton Bank,

Ins. Co. V. Hodgson,Mariott v. Handy,

V. Sam Badger,Marlatt v. Warwick, .Marquand v. N. Y. Man. Co.,Marsh v. Griffin,

V. Hague,V. Hunter,V. Lee,V. Reed, .V. Wheeler,

Marshall v. Billingsly.u. Means,V. Stephens,

Marston v. Brackett,Marten v. Van Schaick,Martin v. Bell, .

V. Densford,V. Dryden,V. Greer,V. Jackson, . 115, 11V. McBryde,V. Martin,V. Melville,V. Mowlin,V. Pycroft,V. Sale, . '

u. Weil, .V. Wincoop,

Martinetti v. Maguire,Marvin v. Elwood,

u. Tittsworth,V. Trumbull,

Maryland, &c., Co. v. Wingert,Mason v. Begg, .

V. Blair, .V. Connell, . . 241V. Libbey,V. Man, .V. Martin,Matter of,V. Williams,

23361

111261233310,31461

26882, 241

103

28518, 19

640040057

197110

,

9717424226825858

1622021361833104637624345

258321331573033101071108715331061

213205, 206

HI24636325786

24233

221363290183

261,Mason v. York, .Mason's Estate, .Massey v. Bowen,

V. Mcllwain,u, Parker,

Massie v, Greenhow,Mastin v. Marlow,Mathis V. StufflebeamMatlack v. James,Matthews v. Aiken,

V. Dragaud,V. Matthews,V. Ward,

Matthewson v. Clarke,Mattox V. Tremain, .Maude v. Rodes,Maulden v. Armistead,Maury v. Lewis,Maxwell v. Hyslop, .

V. Kennedy, .u. Maxwell, .V. Pittenger,V. Wightwick,

May V. Armstrong,u. Eastin,

.

V. LeClaire,V. Smith, .V. Snyder, .V. Williams,

Mayberry v. Brien,Mayer v. GuUuchat, .Mayham v. Coombs, .Mayne v. Baldwin,

V. Griswold, .Mayo V. Judah,

.

V. Murchie,Mayor, &c., of Basingstoke v. Lord

Bolton,. . 237,

of Beverly v. Att.-Gen.,&c., of York V. Pilkinton,

Mead v. Camiield,u. Merritt,

Meads v. Langdon's Heirs,Meason v. Kaine,

. 33, 82, 86, 240Mechanics' Bankt). Levy, 10, 305, 308,

344V. Lynn,

Meconkey v. Rodgers,Medlock v. Cogburu, .Meeker v. Meeker,Mehl V. Von Derwulbeke,Melchor v. Barger,Melick V. Darling,

V. Melick,Melleesh v. Bridger,

.

V. Robertson,Meluish v. Milton,Mendes v. Guedella,

.

Meng V. Houser,

31626345864415118633

24326959

23050

24236024383

379204303230183333403389144309177345233344

.

' 153. 283

303, 309. 107

93,84,

111,

61,

302

23871

19483198248

30824029277779393

31627416824858

270

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixix

Merced Mining Co. v. Freemont

Ixx CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Monk V. Harper,Monro v. Allaire,

V. Taylor,Monroe v. James,Montague v. Dudman,

V. Lobdell,V. Turpin, .

Montefiore v. Guedella,Montefiori v. Browne,Montgomery v. Milliken,Moodie v. Bannister,Moody V. Payne,Mooers v. White,Moore's Appeal,Moore v. Anderson,

V. Appleton,V. Auditor,V. Beason,V, Bray, .V. Burrows,V. Cable, .V. Crofton,V. Connell,V. Cornell,V. Gamble,. Green,V. Harrisburg Bank,V. Hershy,V. Hylton, . 196,V. Isley,

V. Lackey,V. Marrable,V. Mooney,V. Moore, . 264,V. Murrah,i;. Small,

Moorer v. Korpmann,Morehouse v. Cotheal,Moreland v. Atkinson,

V. Laucasters,Morenhaut v. Higuera,Moreton v. Harrison,Morey v. Forsyth,

V. Herrick,Morgan v. Annis,

Ex parte,V. Higgins,V. Malison,Matter of,V. Morgan,V. Pope,V. Scott,V. Smith,

Morning Star v. Selby,Mornington v. MorningtonMorrill . Colehour, .Morris v. Bethell,

V. Dillard,V. Haines,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxi

Murray v. Glass,

Ixxii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Northampton Paper Mills

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxiii

Palmer v. Van Doren,

Ixxiv CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

81

People V. Jlercein, . . 280, 283V. San Francisco, . . 177V. Wilcox, . . 280, 281

People's Bank v. Pearsons, . 268Perin v. Carey, . . . 198Perkins v. Hadsell, ... 86

V. Hallowell, . . 196, 356V. Kershaw, . . . 269Matter of, . . . 293V. McGavock, . .179V. Nichols, . . . 363V. Swank, . . . 151V. Wright, . . 77, 84

Perry Herrick v. Attwood, . 150V. Boileau, ... 45V. Carr, . . . .303V. Parker, . . .195

Persch v. Quiggle, . . 220, 310Person v. Nevitt, . . 418Peru, Republic of, v. Weguelin, 8, 314Peter v. Beverly, . . 37, 136Peters v. Florence, . . . 168

V. Goodrich, . . 151, 153Petesch v. Hambach,... 84Petillon V. Hippie, . . .175Peto V. Hammond,

V. Railroad Co., .Petrie v. Clark,Pettit, Matter of,Pettitt V. Chandler, .

In re,V Jennings,

Petty V. Petty, .Peugh V. Davis,

.

Peyton v. Alcorn,(/. Smith,

Phares v. Barbour,Pharis v. Leachman, .Phelps & SpafFord v. Curtis

V. Green,V. Piatt,V. Pond,V. Prothero, .V. Stewart,

Philadelphia's Appeal,Phila. & Erie v. Catawissa R. R

Company,. . . 321

Wilm. & Bait. R. R. vWoelpper, . . . 110

Philbrook v. Delano, . . .128Philhower v. Todd, . . .194Philips V. Crammond, 33, 83, 142

II. Thompson, . . 91Phillips's Appeal, . . . 386Phillips V. Belden, . . 227, 228

V. Berger, ... 83V. Cook, . . . 242V. Edwards, ... 86V. Evans, . . .193

151207251293

10, 30829720

18011228528026825023

23113

136346230363

Phillips V. Hollister, .

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxv

Pointup V. Mitchell, .

Ixxvi CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Quackenbusli v. Van Riper,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxvii

Richards v. Salter,V. Seal,

Richards's Appeal,.

Richardson v. Eyton,V. Hall, .V. Hunt, .V. Inglesby,'(/. Jones, .V. McKinson,V. Merrifield,V. Wyatt,

Richmond v. Aiken, .V. Dubuque R. R. Co.,V. FooteV. Gray,

Ricketts v. Montgomery,Rider v. Riley,

.

Ridgely v. Bond,Ridgley v. Warfield,Ridgway v. Bank of Tennessee

V. Toram, . 371Ridgway's Appeal,Ridley v. McNairy,Ridout V. Dowding,Riker v. Darke,

.

Riley v. McCord,Rinehart v. Harrison,Rines v. Bachelder,Ring V. Ashworth,Ringgold V. Bryan,

V. RinggoldRingo V. Warder,Riopelle v. Doellner,Ripple V. Ripple,Rippy V. Grant, .Rittson V. Stordy,Roach V. Summers,Roane v. Pickett,Robards v. Wortham,Robb V. Mudge, .

V. Stevena,Robbins v. Davis,Roberts v. Anderson,

V. Beekwith,V. Croft,u, Denny,V. Ebenhart,V. Evans,u. Gordon,V. Jackson,Matter of,u. Moseley,V. Tottan,V. Welch,

Robertson v, Bingley,V. Guerin,V. Maxcey,V. Stephens.V. Subiett,

203

Ixxviii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Ross . Adams, .... 389. Butler, . . . .211V. Carter, .... 364v. Clore, . . . .210V. Drake, .... 136V. Gibbs, .... 6I/. Henderson, . . . 239V. Howell, . . . .241V. Norvell, . . . Ill, 115V. Prentiss, . . .417V. Ross, .... 351V. Union Pacific R. R., . 81V. Whitson, . . 128

Rossiter v. Cossitt, . . . 233Rough V. Marshall, . . .392Rowan v. Sharpe's Rifle Company,

110, 111Rowe V. Tonkin,Rowell V. Flannelly,Rowland v. Martindale,

V. Morgan,Rowlands v. Evans,Rowley v. Rowley,Rowton V. Rowton,Roy V. Wallink,Royal !;. McKenzie,Royer's Appeal,Royston v. Royston,Rozier v. Griffith,Rucker v. Abel, .

V, Howard,V. Robinson,V. Wynne,

Rudisell V. Watson,Rugge V. Ellis, .Rumbly v. Stainton,Rumph V. Abercrombie,Runney Dey, Matter of,Runnell v. Read,Runnells v. JacksonRunyun v. Mersereau,Rush V. Madeira,Russ V. Hawes, .Russell's Appeal,Russell V. Austin,

V. Church,V. Clark,V. Failer,V. Howard,V. Jackson,V. Laice, . . . 121V. Lanier, . . 335V. Mansfield, ... 20V. Randolph, . . .272V. Russell, . . .123v. Southard, . . .111

Rust V. Ware, . . . .198Rutherford v. Branch Bank, . 269

V. Green, . . 136

33,

3351682214224318523384

36328523123210139326-8

1754590

34618329116833

114416

303, 304171233188323267272

Rntherford v. Jones, .V. Ruff, .

Rutland v. Paige,Rutledge v. Greenwood,Ryall V. Rowes, .Ryan v. McLeod,

V. Dox,V. Shawneytown,

Ryno V. Darby, .

Sabin v. Gilman,Sahler v. Signer,Sainsbury v. Jones, .Sale V. McLean, .

V. Moore, .Salisbury, Matter of,

.

Salmon v. Claggett, 8, 208,

V. Cutts,Salomons v. Laing,Saltonstall v. Sanders,Saltus V. Tobias,Salusbury v. Denton,Sample v. Barnes,Sanches v. Carriaga,Sanders v. Rodway,

V. Watson,Appeal,

Sandford v. Jackson,V. McLean,

Sandon v. Hooper,Sapp V. Phelps, .Sarles v. Sarles,Saunders v. Albritton,

u. Edwards,V. Frost,V. Wilson, .

Savage v. Benham,Savannah Bank v. HaskinsSawyer v. Mills,Saxon V. Barksdale;Saylor's Appeal,Sayre v. Sayre, .

V. Townshends,Scales V. Collins,Scarlett v. Hunter,Scarsdale v. Curzon, .Schaffner v. Schilling,Schseffner v. Grutzmacher,Schalk V. Schmidt, .Scheetz's Appeal,Schemerhorn v. Barhydt,Schenck v. ElUngwood,

V. Hart,u. Schenck's Ex'rs,

Schenck's Adm'r v. CuttrellSchlecht's Appeal,Schmertz v. Shreere,Schmidt V. Livingston,

. 230183403

. 26853

37533

. 31084

. 282

.11891

. 33129

296, 385269, 303,

36361, 134

31967

34030

19819745

2699494

26911839220819740

118, 3911830916830333634731733

276884216833

355199, 317

2749917557

19235424085

251,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxix

Schmitheimer v. Eisernan,Schmuker's Estate v. Reel,Schnitzel's Appeal, .Schofield V. Redfern,School V. Kirwin,

Dist. No. 3 V. McLoon, 86, 346Com. V. Putnam,

Schooley v. Romain,Schooner William Thomas v. Ellis, 268Schoonover v. Dougherty, .Schotsmans v. LancashireYorkshire R. R Co

Schriver v. Seiss,Schroder v. Schroder,Schryver v. Teller,Schuyler v. Hoyle,Schwarz v. Wendell,Scott V. Bilgerry,

V. Britton,V. Clarkson,V. Preeland,V. Gallagher,V. Gamble,V. Hastings,V. Miller, .I'. Rayment,

Scribner v. Allen,Scrimeger v. Buckhannon,Scudder v. Trenton Del. Palls,

V. Vanarsdale,Seabrook v. Rose,Sears v. Hyer, .

V. Dixon, .V. La Force,V. Smith, .

Sebring v. Mercereau,Sechal v. Mosenthal, .Second Church v. Disbrow,Second Cong. Soc, &c.

Cong. Soc, &c..Second Nat'l Bank's Appeal,Sedgwick v. Cleveland,Seevers v. Delashmutt,Seguin v. Meverick, .Seifred v. People's Bank, .Seighortner v. Weissenborn,Seitz V. Mitchell,Seixo V. Provezende, .Sellers v. Stalcup,Sellings v. Baumgardner, .Sellman v. Bowen,Semmes v. Mayor of Columbus,S. E. Railway v. Knoll,Sergeant's Ex'rs v. Ewing,Sergeant v. Ingersoll, . 157Seton V. Slade, .Severance v. Hilton, .Sewell V. Baxter,Sexton V. Wheaton,

61

. First

15032

2695760

196107

171

12677, 80

94270313337911113631841531771614

2403033022101362682311112691282307831

159

145, 146

36424540915341733735436321711131623535687

22916290

19233

147

Seymour v. Darrow, .

Ixxx CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Shipp V. Swann,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxxi

Smith V. Lowe,.

Ixxxii CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Stallings . Stallings,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxxiii

Stuart V. Coalter,u. Harrison,V. Kissam,

Stuart's Heirs v. Coalter,Stump V. Pindlay,

V. Gaby,V. Rogers,

Sturges V. Gary,V. Longworth, 313

Sturgis V. Champneys,Sturtevant v. Goode,Stuyvesant v. Hale, .

V. Hall, .V. Hone, .V. Peckham

Suessenguth v. BingenheimerSugden v. Crossland,Sullivan u. Blackwell,

V. Tuck,V. Winthrop,

Suman v. Springate, .Summerhill v. Tapp, .Summers v. Roos,Sumner v. Hampston,

V. Jlarcy,V. Rhodes,

Surgett V. Byers,Sutherland v. Harrison,

V. Parkins,Sutton, &o., Co. V. Kitchens,

V. Wilders,Suydam v. Beals,

V. Northwest Ins. CoSwaisland v. Dearsley,Swan u. Dent,Swartzer v. Gillet,Swayne v. Lyon,Swayze v. Swayze,Swazey v. Bible Society,Sweet V. Benning,

V. Mitchell,V. Parker,V. Sweet, .

Sweeting v. Sweeting,Sweetzer's Appeal,Sweezy v. Thayer,Swift V. Eckford,

V. Swift, .Swinburn v. SwinburnSynnot v. Simpson,Sypher v. McHenry,

Tabb V. Archer,Taber v. Hamlin,Taggert v. Bolden,Talbot V. JIcGeo,

V. Pierce,V. Scott, .

V. Wilkins,

.

Ixxxiv CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Thomas v. Kelsey,

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. IxXXV

312

Tremper v. Barton,Trescott v. King,

V. Smyth,Trevor v. McKay,Tritt V. Colwell,Trotter v. Blocker,

V. Erwin,Trough's Estate,Troup V. Haight,

V. Hurlbut,V. Sherwood, .

Trout V. Trout,Trowbridge v. Harleston.Trucks V. Lindsay,Trull V. Eastman,

u. Trull, .Truly V. Wanser,Trustees v. Hossle,

V. Wright,of Huntington v. Nicoll,ofWatertown v. Cowan,

Tucker v. Andrews,V. Barrow,V. Carpenter,V. Cheshire,V. Keeler,V. Madden,V. Oxley,V. Tucker,

Tufnell V. Constable,Tulk V. Moxhay,Tully V. Harloe,Tully's Ex'rs v. Smith,Tunno v. Trezevant,Turley v. Young,TurnbuU v. Gadsen, .Turner v. Bissell,

V. Burrows,V. Cameron's Co.,V. Clay,V. Crebill,V. Dickerson, .In re, .

V. Kerr, .V. Marriott,V. Narigation Co., .V. Petigxew, .V. Thompson,V. Turner,

Turnipseed v. Cunningham,Turnpike, &c., v. Barnet, .

Co. V. Allen,Turton v. Barber,Tuttle V. Jackson,Twopenny v. Peyton,Twyne's Case, .Tyler v. Black, .Tyne v. Dougherty, .Tyree v. Williams,

33, 10211031919845401281'78

22'7

15337133

2Y211118662198194128199364180104356308114168243310106152110183243320177239268W477

15719

28211184

17733

210194, 389

111210226

7

1534215117735684

Tyrell v. Bank,V. Morris,

Tyson v. Watts,

. 184

. 25177, 82

Uhler V. Hutchinson, . . . 153Underbill v. Dennis, . . . 282

V. Van Cortlandt, . 403Underwood v. Brockman, . 182, 189Union Bank v. Baker, . 33

V. Bank of Com-merce, . . 243

V. Buck, . . 268V. Geary, . 21, 363V. Kerr, . . 205of London i>. Manby, 17

Unitarian Soc. v. Woodbury, . 33United N. J. R. R. Co. v. Hop-

pock, .... 9, 19United States v. Duncan, . 270, 272

u. Green, . . 280V. Hunter, . . 269V. Keokuk, . . 198V. McRae,

. . 3V. Monroe, . . 168V. Parrott, . . 208V. Price, . .173V. Samperyac, 416, 417V. Stone, . . 188V. Throckmorton, 419V. Wagner, . .314Bank v. Lee, 153Ins. Co.i. Shriver, 272

Upham V. Brooks, . . . 317Upshaw V. Upshaw, ... 96Uram v. Coates, ... 28Utica Ins. Co. v. Lynch, 57, 308, 344

Vaiden v. Stubblefield,Vail V. Foster, ....Valentine v. Farrington, .

V. Johnson,Van Alst v. Hunter, .Van Amaringe v. EUmaker,Vanartsdalen v. Vanartsdalen, .Van Buren . Olmstead, . IllVan Cortlandt v. Beekman,

0. Underbill,Vanderhaize t)..Hugues,Vanderveer v. Stryker,Van Doren v. Robinson,Vandoren v. Todds, .Van Dyke's Appeal, .Van Dyke v. Van Dyke,Vane v. Rigden,Van Epps v. Van Dusen,Van Hook v. Whitlock,Vanhorn o. Duckworth,Van Houten v. 1st Dutch Ref. OhVan Houten's Case, .

314268268268248240280118

.

' 303. 192. Ill. 33581, 86. 128

93. 363. 250

281340334196280

48,

337!

IxXXvi CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Van Huseu v. Kanouse,

CASES CITED IN AMEllIGAN NOTES. IxXXvii

"Warner v. Daniels,

Ixxxviii CASES cited in AMERICAN NOTES.

Wetmore v. Scovill, .

CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES. Ixxxix

Williams v. Jenkins, .

xc CASES CITED IN AMERICAN NOTES.

Woodrum v. Kirkpatrick,

THE

DOCTRINE OF EQUITY.

INTRODUCTION.

The subject of the present Treatise is the prerogativejurisdiction of the Great Seal for giving effect to certaincivil rights, technically called Equities, where the ordi-nary process of law is inadequate.

By the original system of English jurisprudence as ex-plained by Lord Chief Justice Hale, the whole judicialauthority of the Crown was exercised by the King inperson, sitting in his Royal Court, called the Aula orCuria Regis. Portions of this authority were afterwards

delegated to the courts of law ; and where an injury hadbeen committed, which the authority of those courts wasadequate to redress, a writ under the Great Seal was

issued out of chancery, called an original writ, directed

to the sheriff of the county where the injury was allegedto have been committed, containing a summary statement

of the cause of complaint, and requiring him to bring thewrongdoer before the proper coui't of law, there to answer

the plaintiff's charge. The use of original writs in per-

sonal actions is now abolished. But such a writ was1

XXIX ADAMS S DOCTRINE OF EQUITY.

formerly essential to the institution of any action in the

superior court of law, and in real and mixed actions it isstill necessary. The portion of the royal authority whichwas not thus delegated to the courts' of law appears to

have remained in the Sovereign as a branch of the pre-rogative, and to have been naturally intrusted to the LordChancellor as the minister in whose custody the Great

r. ^ Seal was placed.-^ The *manner of its exerciseI XXX*-

-^ was by another writ, also issuing under the GreatSeal, called the writ of subpoena, which was directed tothe defendant personally, and commanded him under apenalty to appear to answer such things as were alleged

against him, and to abide by the decree which should bemade. The principle by which its exercise was regulatedappears to have been the one above stated, viz., that ofaffording an effectual remedy, where the remedy at com-mon law was imperfect, but not, as has been sometimeserroneously supposed, that of creating a right which thecommon law had denied.

The existence of this prerogative or equitable jurisdic-tion seems to be in a great degree peculiar to this country,and to pervade the whole system of its judicial polity.^The Court of Exchequer, established for enforcing pay-ment of debts and duties to the King, and incidentallyadministering justice to the debtors and accountants tothe Crown, was, until the recent abolition by statute ofits equitable jurisdiction, subdivided into a court of equity,and a .court of common law ; and there are also severalinferior courts of equity, which exercise exclusive juris-diction over matters within their cognizance, having their

1 Hale's Jurisdiction of H. L. ; King v. Hare, 1 Str. 150; 1 Story on Eq.,

s. 41-49 ; 3 Steph. Black. 407 ; Steph. on Plead. 5.Mitf. 6, 50, 151.

INTRODUCTION. XXX

own peculiar courts of appeal, and without any appellatejurisdiction in the Court of Chancery. If, howoA'er, asuit be commenced in those courts, where the cause ofsuit is without their jurisdiction, or where by reason ofthe limited jurisdiction of the court the defendant cannothave complete justice, the defendant, before decision ofthe suit, may jBle a bill in the High Court of Chancery,showing the incompetency of the inferior court, and pray-ing a special writ of certiorari to remove the cause into

the Court of Chancery. The principal inferior jurisdic-tions in England which have cognizance of equitable eases.are those of the counties Palatine of Lancaster and Dur-

ham, the Courts of the two Universities of Oxford andCambridge, the Courts of the City of London, and theCinque Ports. The County Palatine of Chester, and thePrincipality of Wales, had also, formerly, courts of equi-table jurisdiction, but these courts are now abolished.^

The earliest instances which have been hitherto pub-lished of the exercise *of the'prerosative iuris- r-,- -i

~ o . . r'xxxi]diction of the Great Seal, are found m a seriesof Chancery records commencing with the reign of Richard2, and ending with that of Elizabeth, which was publishedin 1827, 1830, and 1832, by the Record Commissioners.-

Some of the petitions contained in this collection ap-pear to have been merely presented to the Chancellor, asthe ofl&cial framer of ordinary writs, to obtain a suitable

'one for the plaintiff's case ; others, especially during the

reigns of Edward 4, Henry 6, and Henry 8, are for a writin the nature of a habeas corpus to have the complainant

' Mitf. on Pleading 6, 50, 151 ; 1 Daniel's Chancery Practice 509 ; 1

Haddock's Chancery Practice 249 ; 1 Equity Draftsman 131 ; 5 Vict. o. 5;

11 Geo. 4 & 1 Wm. 4, c. 70, s. 14.' Calendar of Chancery Proceedings, vols. 1, 2 and 3.

XXXI ADAMS S DOCTRINE OF EQUITY.

released from an illegal imprisonment ; but in the majorityof instances they appeal to the prerogative jurisdiction ofthe Chancellor, and pray, not that the wrong complainedof may be remedied at law, but that the Chancellor willexamine the parties, and give appropriate redress.

In many cases a special ground is alleged for callingon the Chancellor to exercise a jurisdiction, which wouldnaturally fall within the province of the common law

courts. One of the grounds so alleged, and whichstrongly marks the character of the age, is the difficultyof obtaining justice by reason of the wealth and powerof the wrongdoer. Thus in one case, it is said that theplaintiff cannot have any remedy at law in consequenceof the defendant being surrounded by many men of hismaintenance. In another, that the defendant is strong

and abounding in riches, and a great maintainer of quar-rels, and the complainant is poor, and hath not the meansto sue for remedy at the common law. In a third, therelief is prayed, " becaus? your petitioners, John andCatherine, are so poor, and the said John so ill, that theycannot pursue the common law." Of this sort of juris-diction there are many instances, but in one case, towardsthe end of Henry the Eighth's reign, the prayer is, thatthe petitioner, who had been restrained by injunctionfrom proceeding at law, " may be relieved from the pro-hibition, because he is a poor man, and unable to sue iu

,

the King's Court of Chancery." ^

The jurisdiction exercised on the ground of poverty oroverbearing power has necessarily died with the state ofsociety in which it originated ; but it appears, like the

' Goddard v. Ingepenne, 1 Chan. Cal. viii. ; Thomas v. Wyse, Id. xiv.

;

Bell V. Savage, Id. xiv. ; Royal v. Garter, Id. cxxx.

INTRODUCTION. XXXU

present jurisdiction of *the court, to have been r-^ ..-,based on the principle of giving an efficaciousremedy for a right existing at lav?, and many instancesoccur in the records where the ordinary doctrines ofmodern equity are brought forward as the grounds forrelief. The most frequent of these equities, especiallyin the latter years of Henry 6, and in the subsequentreigns, is for enforcing conveyances by feoffees in trust

;

but many other ordinary equities occur. Thus, for ex-ample, we find a bill seeking to set aside a conveyancewhich the defendant had obtained by intoxicating theplaintiff;^ a bill by a tithe-owner to obtain payment forhis tithes f a bill stating that the plaintiff had recoveredher land at law, but that the defendant continued vexa-

tiously to harass her, and seeking to have him restrained fa bill by an executor, stating that the defendant had bya trick obtained from him a general release, when he wasignorant of a debt due from the defendant to his testator,

and intended the release to apply to other matters, andpraying an injunction against setting it up at law as adischarge of that debt;* a bill against an executor for

payment of his testator's debt f a bill to perpetuate tes-timony f a bill for discovery of title deeds f and a billfor specific performance of a contract.*

It must not, however, be supposed that in all the peti-

tions to the Chancellor contained in these records the

' Stonehouse v. Stanshaw, 1 Ch. Cal. xxix.* Arkenden v. Starkey, Id.