ADMINISTRATORS. 1. An administrator who pleads the general issue and plenè administravit, and succeeds on the latter plea, is entitled to the general costs of the cause. Iggulden v. Terson, 277 2. An administrator, who was under terms to plead issuably, pleaded plenè administravit and his own bankruptcy; the plaintiff signed judgment, treating the pleas as a nullity, being inconsistent with each other, and one of them at least being false; and the Court refused to set aside the judgment. Searle v. Bradshaw, 289 ADMINISTRATOR. Where a cause was referred to arbitration, the costs being to abide the event, and the action was brought by an administrator, with counts in the declaration on promises to himself as administrator, and the arbitrator awarded that the plaintiff had no cause of action:-Held, that the plaintiff was liable to an attachment for not paying the costs, and that the terms of the submission could not be varied by affidavits shewing that it was not the intention to make him personally liable. Spivy (Administrator) v. Webster, 46 ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY. See ATTORNRY, 7, 10, 12, 13, 19, 20, 21, 25. AFFIDAVIT. See ADDITION, 1, 2—Attorney, 1— BAIL, 18-BANKRUPT, 2-INTerPLEADER, 20. 1. An affidavit made by a defendant in a cause cannot be read, unless his addition is inserted. Lawson v. Case, 40 2. Since the 11 Geo. 4 & 1 Will. 4, c. 70, s. 4, it is no objection to an affidavit to ground an attachment 2. An affidavit of debt for the price of goods guaranteed by the defendant, without shewing on what terms, or that the time for payment has expired:-Held, bad. Angus v. Robilliard, 90 3. An affidavit of debt for money lent and interest, without shewing how the interest accrued, is bad. Whether, since the 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 42, s. 11, a defendant arrested by a wrong Christian name can apply to be discharged on motion, quære. Callum v. Leeson, 381 4. An affidavit of debt, sworn before the signer of the bills of Middlesex, before the 2 Will. 4, c. 39, was in force, will not authorize the issue of a writ of capias since that act came into operation. Beck v. Young, 462 5. In an affidavit on a bill of exchange, it is necessary to state the amount of the bill. Westmacott v. Cook, 519. 6. An affidavit of debt on a bill of exchange, in an action against the drawer, alleged that the bill having become due was wholly unpaid. On a motion to discharge the defendant out of custody because the affidavit did not sufficiently shew a default by the acceptor, the Court refused to interfere. Weedon v. Medley, 689 7. Where the arrest was on the 22nd of May :-Held, that it was too late, on June 4, to obtain the defendant's discharge on the ground of a defect in the affidavit, the sheriff having in the meantime been ruled to return the writ, and make his return. Firley v. Rallett, 708 8. An affidavit of debt for principal and interest due on a bill of exchange must shew what amount is due for principal independent of interest. Latreille v. Hoepner, 758 9. “ Bath, in the county of Somerset, Esq.," is a sufficient description in the Common Pleas of a deponent in an affidavit of debt. In such an affidavit it is not incorrect to allege the defendant to be indebted to the plaintiff and his wife, administratrix. If the debt was to the intestate on bond, the death of the latter need not be alleged, nor to whom the payment was to be made. To warrant an alias capias into a second county, a fresh affidavit of debt, or a copy of the previous one, need not be filed, if the officer suing it out is deputy filacer for both counties. Coppin v. Potter, 785 10. A defendant waives an objection to an affidavit of debt, by inducing the plaintiff to accept of certain persons as bail, by affecting to acquiesce in the decision of a single judge as to the sufficiency of the affidavit. Mammatt v. Mathew, 797. Held, also, that the rule nisi in such a case ought to have specified the grounds of the motion. 5. An attachment for not performing an award will not be granted if an action has been commenced, except upon the terms of discontinuing the action, and paying the costs. Where a cause and all matters in difference are referred, a recital in the award that the action was referred, without mentioning other matters in difference, does not constitute an objection to the award on the face of it. Such an objection should be made the ground of a separate application to set aside the award, supported by affidavits shewing what were the other matters in difference. A Judge's order for referring a cause may be made a rule of Court, though the defendant gave no authority to his attorney to consent to its See PRIVILEGE FROM ARREST, 1. It is no ground for discharging a defendant out of custody, that the plaintiff was not at the time of the arrest in possession of the bill of exchange on which the defendant was arrested, and that it was in the possession of persons to whom the plaintiff was indebted, and to whom he had indorsed it over, if it appears that those persons only hold the bill as trustees for the plaintiff, and are willing to give up the bill for the purposes of the suit. Stone v. Butt, 335 ARREST (RIGHT OF). ARREST (WITHOUT PROBA- See COSTS, 1, 2, 11, 13, 18, 19, 26, 27. Where a defendant was held to bail in a much larger sum than the plaintiff recovered:-Quare whether, if it had been a case within the act 43 Geo. 3, c. 46, by reason of the absence of a reasonable or probable cause for holding to bail to such an amount, the mere fact of the defendant's not having been actually arrested would have been sufficient to deprive him of the benefit of that act? Wilson v. Broughton, 631 ARREST (SECOND). See DISCONTINUANCE, 1-IRISH JUDGMENT, 1. 1. Where a defendant, being in custody on mesne process, was discharged on the terms of his giving bills, which he neglected to do, and the plaintiff arrested him again without a fresh affidavit or a Judge's order, the second arrest was held to be regular. Cantellon v. Trueman, 2 2. In case of a second arrest, for the same cause of action, it is not necessary to indorse on the process that it was made by leave of the Court; or to make a second affidavit of debt, if both writs are issued by the same officer. Richards v. Stew754 art, ASSIGNEES. See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 2BANKRUPT, 1. ATTACHMENT. See AFFIDAVIT, 2-ARBITRATION, 5 —Bankrupt, 4—Barrister, 3– CONTEMPT, 1, 2-MISNOMER, 1— SHERIFF, 2, 4. 1. Upon a motion for an attachment for nonpayment of money, the Court refused to allow cause to be shewn at chambers, though it was at the end of the term. Fall v. Fall, 88 2. Where a person keeps out of the way to avoid being served personally with a rule, preparatory to obtaining an attachment against him, and it is clearly made out to the satisfaction of the Court, the Court will dispense with personal service. Green v. Prosser, on 99 behalf 3. The Court refused, of bail to the action, to set aside a regular attachment against the sheriff, upon an affidavit of merits, and on payment of costs, where the rule for the allowance of bail had not been served on the plaintiff's attorney. It is not necessary for bail, on mov 5. An attachment for costs is now grantable without first issuing a subрепа. Doe d. - v. Barker, 217 6. Where a client obtained an order that his attornies should deliver him an account of all monies received on his behalf, and they accordingly deliver an account, the Court refused to grant an attachment against them upon affidavits impeaching the correctness of the account. Ex parte Laurence, 230 7. In order to bring a party into contempt by not paying money according to an order, a demand of the money must be made after the order has been made a rule of Court. Chilton v. Ellis, 338 8. Where an action was brought by an attorney for his bill of costs, and the defendant obtained an order to tax the bill, but which order did not contain any direction to the defendant to pay what was due, though he signed the usual consent in the Judge's book, and another order was afterwards made for reviewing the taxation, which also contained no direction to the defendant to pay what was due, and the Master found a sum of money to be due to the plaintiff, who made the latter order only a rule of Court:-Held, that an attachment obtained thereon was irregular, as it did not contain any order on the defendant to pay. Ryalls v. Emerson, 357 9. In serving a rule for payment of costs, it is not necessary that the original rule should be placed in the hands of the defendant; if it is shewn |