et aside the proceedings, because several defendants in several causes were included in one affidavit. The Court said they would examine the cases cited before they determined this point; and on this day Lord KENYON, Ch. J. said-We are of opinion, on looking into the cases cited from the Term Reports, that they ought to govern the present; and that the proceedings must be set aside. And his lordship added, that he thought this a beneficial rule for the suitors. 1794. Moss against BIRCH Rule absolute (a). (a) Vide The Dean and Chapter of Exeter v. Seagell, post. 6 vol. 688. THE END OF TRINITY TERM. The following Rule of Court was made in Hilary Term in the thirty-fourth Year of the present Reign. REGULA GENERALIS. IT is ordered that the Names of all the Cases in which this Court did in the now last, or in this present Term, order Writs of Attachment to issue, in order to compel any person to answer upon Interrogatories, and on which Judgment shall not have been given in the course of this Term, shall be inserted in the list of Motions appointed to come on peremptorily in the next Term, in order that the Court may be informed what shall have been done in prosecution of such Writs. And it is further ordered, that in future whenever any such 1794. Wednesday, If the plaintiff hold two defendants to bail on a joint writ, and declare against them seve rally, the set aside all the pro- Moss and Another against BIRCH and Another. THE defendants were held to bail on an affidavit which stated a joint cause of action; there was also one ac etiam in the writ, as on a joint debt; and afterwards the plaintiffs declared against the defendant severally. A rule was then obtained to set aside the proceedings for irregularity, on the authoCourt will rity of Holland v. Johnstone (a), and Holland v. Richards (b). Holroyd shewed cause against that rule (c), and admitted that the arrest was irregular, and that consequently the plaintiffs must abandon their right to the bail, but contended that that was no reason why all the proceedings should be set aside. Originally a plaintiff might have held several defendants to bail on the same writ: but the stat. 13 Car. 2. st. 2. c. 2. required that the true cause of action should be specified in the body of the writ or process; the statute saying that if the cause of action be not expressed in the writ, &c. the defendant shall not be compelled to give security, or to enter into bond with sureties for his appearance, &c. But the only consequence of not complying with this requisition is, that the plaintiff loses his right to exact bail of the defendant; but the writ itself not being affected by this defect, there is no ground to set aside all the proceedings on it, as there was in the cases alluded to; for there the writ itself was irregular, there being several ac etiams in one writ; whereas here the writ is good. In De la Cour v. Read (d), the defendant who had been held to bail was discharged, because the plaintiff declared against him in a different cause of action from that expressed in the writ; but yet the Court did not set aside the proceedings on that account. He also cited Com. Rep. 74. to shew that the plaintiff might declare against different persons severally who were included in the same writ. Wigley, in support of the rule, said that in Holland v. Johnson, and Holland v. Richards, the Court did not proceed merely on the ground that the writ itself was irregular, but that all the proceedings were so ; and that in Gilby v. Lockyer (e) the Court (a) Ante, 4 vol. 695. (b) Ib. 697. n. b. (d) 2 H. Bl. Rep. C. B. 278. set et aside the proceedings, because several defendants in several causes were included in one affidavit. The Court said they would examine the cases cited before they determined this point; and on this day Lord KENYON, Ch. J. said-We are of opinion, on looking into the cases cited from the Term Reports, that they ought to govern the present; and that the proceedings must be set aside. And his lordship added, that he thought this a beneficial rule for the suitors. 1794. Moss against BIRCH Rule absolute (a). (a) Vide The Dean and Chapter of Exeter v. Seagell, post. 6 vol. 688. THE END OF TRINITY TERM. The following Rule of Court was made in Hilary Term in the thirty-fourth Year of the present Reign. REGULA GENERALIS. IT is ordered that the Names of all the Cases in which this And it is further ordered, that in future whenever any such AN INDEX TO THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS In the FIFTH VOLUME. A. ABATEMENT, See PLEADING, No. 9. 15. 18. 21, 22, ACCORD, See PLEADING, No. 8. 16. ACTION, See NOTICE. Ribr ACT, No. 1, 2. ACTION ON THE CASE, 1. A count in a declaration, stating that was not stated that he was to receive it. ADMINISTRATOR, EXECU See PLEADING, No. 11, 12. |