e practice of filing declarations, by the bye lered. Southey v. Magan, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 250, here a declaration in chief was filed in Hilary and an appearance entered in that term, the plaintiff declared against the defendant on rd of April, and served a copy of the declaraon that day. Held, that the proceedings were ctly regular according to the practice of the t, and that 52nd general rule does not at all that practice. Story v. Hassard, 10 Ir. L.

.547.

trangers to the writ may declare, by the bye bea declaration in chief. Ball and others v. Cox, D. & O. 28, Q. B.

cifying any date, is insufficient. Ferguson v. Hassard, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 178, C P.

But a defendant cannot require the plaintiff to specify in his bill of particulars, under what voucher or document (if any) he claimed with the dates and particulars therof. Ib.

A plaintiff omitted to file a bill of particulars with his declaration; but on being served with a notice of motion on the same day, to compel him to furnish it, paying the costs incurred, forwarded it before six o'clock on the same evening, with an offer to pay the costs incurred up to that time. Held, that he was justified in refusing to sign a consent to pay a taxed bill of costs of the motion; and on the defendant moving the original motion to compel him, it was refused with costs. Hughes v. Fitzgerald, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 114, C. P.

The plaintiff in an action of covenant, was or

A declaration may be filed the day after the year s expired, if the last day be Sunday. Blake v. vis, Bl. D. & O. 114, C. P.

Where the last day for entering an appearance is the first of June, which was also the last day r filing the declaration, so as to have judgment or ea of Trinity Term, and notice of appearance as served on the following day; in consequence f which, the plaintiff lost his opportunity of dearing in time. The court granted liberty to the laintiff to file a declaration, and the rules to plead s of the first of June, and the costs of the motion. Broadbent v. Potter, 1 Ir. Jur. 264, Ex.

If a prisoner be in the custody of the sheriff on nesne process for two terms, without any declaraion having been filed against him, he is not entiled to be discharged from custody, under the 8th of Anne c. 9, Ir. The defendant may, at any time within two terms after his arrest, put the usual twoday rule on the plaintiff, to declare against him; but if he suffer two terms to pass without serving such rule, he must have himself removed by habeas corpus into the custody of the marshal before he can rule the plaintiff to declare. O'Donnell v. Sweeney, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 239, Ex. [Note.-A different practice prevails in England.]

Particulars of demand.]-When the plaintiff does not furnish a bill of particulars, the defendant may move at once for them, without making any application to the plaintiff, and he will be entitled to the costs of the motion. Earl O'Neil v. Orr, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 287, Q. B.

The plaintiff having, in his bill of particulars, referred the defendant to an account previously furnished, and not having sworn to the probable length of the said account, or to the particular time of the service of it, the court directed him to furnish a full account in his bill of particulars. Steele v. Leadbetter, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 376, C. P.

After plea a special case must be made for the delivery of a bill of particulars; an affidavit that they are necessary for the defence is not sufficient. Blackwood v. Jones, 4 Ir. I.. Rep. 328, C. P.

A bill of particulars for money lent, without spe

which he intended to rely, in consequence of the generality of the breach stated in the declaration. Sparkes v. Blacquiere, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 126, C. P.

A plaintiff in trespass was ordered to furnish a bill of particulars of the time when, and the place where the particular acts of trespass complained of were committed, specifying the boundaries by a map. Larkin v. Lauder, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 227, C. P.

In cases of undoubted mistake, the court will amend the particulars of demand, without prejudice to the rules to plead, Scully v. Scully, Bl. D. & O. 285, Ex.

In action by a stock-broker, for the balance of his account, the particulars of demand need not state the names of the parties who purchased shares, though defendant swear such information is necessary for his defence. Bacon v. Greer, Bl. D. & O. 92, Q. B.

In order to entitle the defendant to his costs of demanding further particulars, notice of the irregularity should be given to the plaintiff. Bl. D. & O. 99, Ex.

V.

The court will compel the plaintiff to furnish a bill of particulars in an action of covenant, when the breaches alleged are numerous, and of a general character. Wildridge v. Clarke, 1 Ir. Jur. 151, C. P.

Rules to plead, and motions for further time].A motion for time to plead must be upon notice, Lewis v. Tisdall, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 39, Ex.

Where the time for pleading has expired, but judgment is not marked, the court will not grant further time to plead in the absence of the plaintiff'; but they will grant liberty to serve a notice. Dancer v. Kelly, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 32, C. P.

When, after the expiration of the four-day rule to plead-but before judgment has been markedthe defendant applied for time to plead, and obtained leave to serve a notice on the opposite party; after which the plaintiff's attorney marked judgment before the notice had been served upon him, although he had been verbally apprised of the order. The court ordered the judgment to be set aside with costs, and enlarged the time to plead. Dancer v. Kelly, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 64, C. P.

A rule to plead was set aside as irregular, having been entered as of a day prior to that on which no

tice of the filing of the declaration was served. Anonymous, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 204, Q. B.

Application for time to plead, after judgment had been marked for want of a plea pending a consent served for time and which offered to plead substanti ally issuable pleas, was granted on the terms of defendant's paying all the costs incurred, and the costs of the motion. Adams v. Nerney, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 284, C. P.

The court will not give time to plead, unless notice of the motion has been given; and notice served the day before is sufficient. Robinson v. Julian, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 4, C. P.

The rule to plead was set aside for irregularity, having been entered prior to the day on which notice of filing the declaration was served. Governor of Bank of Ireland v. Brown, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 351, Q. B.

The court will, without notice, extend the time for pleading where no trial will be lost. Osborne v. Power, Bl. D. & O. 285, Ex.

same term, against the defendant, who appeared in the second action alone, and filed a demurrer to the declaration in the first. The court held the appearance sufficient, and refused to set aside the demurrer as having been filed without appearance. Day v. Wright, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 179, C. P.

Where, on argument of a demurrer, the objec tions have not been noted in the judges' books, in pursuance of the 134th rule of the court, the party obtaining judgment on such objections will not be allowed his costs. Cochrane v. Fitzpatrick, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 187, Q. B.

All grounds of general demurrer should be noted in the judges' books. Birch v. Blennerhasset, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 394, Q. B.

A demurrer will not be set aside on motion as being frivolous; but if it appear to be so, the court will set it down for immediate argument. Barrett v. Daly, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 518, Q. B.

Pleas, demurrers, &c.]-Leave was given to withdraw a demurrer to a plea in replevin after argument; demurrers to four other pleas having been held good, and issue joined on another. Reeves v. Morris, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 3, Q. B.

The declaration was filed on the 1st of May, against an attorney of the Exchequer, as if he were an attorney of the Queen's Bench, when, in fact, he was not so; and an amended copy of the same was served on him on the 19th of May, and interlocutory judgment was signed on the 2nd of June. Held, that a cautionary notice on the part of the defendant, on the 4th of June, was too late to ground a motion to set aside the proceedings on the ground of irregularity. Stewart v. Chadwick, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 5, Q. B.

Where one of several avowries cannot be amended on the file, it will be necessary to apply to the court for liberty to file a new engrossment of all the avowries to be filed. Dancer v. Kelly, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 3, C. P.

The defendant having pleaded a recovery in the Assistant Barristers' Court, prout patet per recordum, the plaintiff replied nul tiel record, concluding with a verification, and giving a day to the defendant to bring in the record, and afterwards set down the cause for argument. Held, that the plaintiff was irrregular in not having given the defendant an opportunity of rejoining. Fitzimon v. Lyons,

4 Ir. L. Rep. 222, C. P.

volous, upon certain terms with which he does not comply, the court will order the demurrer to be put in the list for argument. Gower v. Brett, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 8, Q. B.

In an action of libel, the defendant having pleaded the general issue, and the special plea of an apology under the 6 & 7 Vic. c. 96, s. 2, the court refused to allow him to withdraw the latter plea, the plaintiff having sworn that he would be prejudiced thereby at the trial. Sullivan v. Lenihen, 7 Ir. L Rep. 463, C. P.

In an action by the assignees of a bankrupt against sheriff for selling a bankrupt's goods, the defendant was allowed to withdraw his plea for the purpose of serving a notice to dispute the act of bankruptcy. Thompson v. Waller, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 155, S. C. BI. D. & O. 27, Q. B.

Pleas in Abatement.]-A plea by an officer of the Court of Chancery, insisting on his privilege to be sued in that court, must be verified by affidavit; and such affidavit must be in positive terms, and not upon belief merely Levy v. Fenton, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 129, Ex.

The defendant, an attorney, who had not taken out license for several years, being served with pro cess, appeared by attorney, and pleaded, in abatement, his privilege to be sued by bill without process. The court refused a motion to set aside the plea, leaving the plaintiff to his replication. Fury v. Ryan, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 518, Ex.

the court will give the plaintiff liberty to mark

Where there is an insufficient plea in abatement

expired. Brett v. Taylor, Bl. D. & O. 35, Ex. An affidavit to verify a plea in abatement is sufficient, though the names of the defendants be not set out, if it appear by necessary implication that the words in the affidavit "defendants in the

suit" mean A. and B., the real defendants. Starke v. Hoyte, Bl. D. & O. 140, Q. B.

Pleas of Confession.]-A defendant after issue joined on a plea of payment, and notice of trial, filed a plea of confession, with a stay of execution

beyond the time it might have been had, if the trial had taken place, without withdrawing his plea of payment. The court set aside both pleas, and allowed the plaintiff to mark judgment. Moffit v. Humphreys, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 312, C. P.

The practice of requiring pleas of confession to De given contemporaneously with securities by bills or notes is improper. Sawyer v. Maguire, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 373, Ex.

A plea of confession given by an attorney before action brought is not invalid, and a judgment entered thereon will not be set aside. Ib. Quære, would it be otherwise in the case of an ordinary individual. 16.

To prevent proceedings being taken, the defendant's attorney undertook to sign a plea of confession for the demand, with the usual stay of execution. The plaintiff's attorney thereupon issued a writ against the defendant, sending a copy to the defendant's attorney, requiring him to enter an appearance thereto for the defendant. The defendaut's attorney refusing to do so, but still offering to sign the plea of confession, a motion to enforce the entry of an appearance to the writ was refused Green v. Bingham, 8 Ir. L. Rep.

with costs.

270, Ex.

Where the defendant inserts a stay of execution in his plea of confession, without the consent of the plaintiff, the application should be to set aside the plea, and the affidavit should negative the fact of consent by the plaintiff. Moore v. Mockler, Bl. D. & O. 31, Ex.

V. Staying Proceedings.

The defendant may enter a rule to stay proceedings until the costs of not going to trial, pursuant to notice, be paid, a trial having been lost by the default of the plaintiff in not delivering the distringas to the sheriff in sufficient time to enable him to summon the jurors six days before the as sizes. Gillespie v. Cumming, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 28, Ex. On a motion to stay proceedings in an action against the bail, on the ground of delay in the plaintiff's proceedings, and that the principal had in the mean time become insolvent, the courts require that the affidavit by the bail should deny collusion with the original defendant. Smith v. Callan, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 180, Q. B.

Seven actions of trespass were brought against the same defendant, by different plaintiffs, for the taking and detention of their goods until payment of an alleged claim for tolls, proceedings were ordered to be stayed, (upon terms,) in six of the causes, and abide the event of the seventh. M'Donnell v. Franks, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 161, Ex.

A motion to stay proceedings in Ireland in an action on a judgment obtained in England, pending a writ of error there, cannot be sustained, unless bail in error have been put in and perfected. Sims v. Thomas, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 415, Ex.

Where two actions had been commenced for the same cause of action, and a rule to discontinue entered in one, proceedings will be stayed in the other, until the costs of the rule to discontinue be paid. Considine v. Mooney, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 485, Q. B.

Where in an action of trespass for diverting a water-course, the plaintiff was non-suited, proceedings were stayed in a second action brought for the same cause, until the costs of the non-suit were paid. Horgan v. Quinlan, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 590, Q. B. The court stayed proceedings in an ejectment, until the costs of a former one, brought in the Queen's Bench by the assignor of the lessor of the plaintiff, were paid, and the costs of the motion, though the tenant taking defence was discharged as an insolvent. Cardale v. O'Connell, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 208, C. P.

A defendant entered the usual rule to stay proceedings, until the costs of not proceeding to trial, pursuant to notice, should have been paid. Held, that defendant by applying for a special jury, and having served notice for the admission of documents before the costs were taxed, waived the benefits of the rule. Deering v. Palmer, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 209, C. P.

Proceedings in ejectment were stayed until the costs in two prior ejectments in the Exchequer were paid, though the plaintiff had been allowed to proceed in the second without an order to pay the costs of the first, and the second was out of court. Duhigg v. Duhigg, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 212, C. P.

A motion for liberty to enter a rule to stay proceedings till the costs of not going to trial pursuant to notice, will not be granted if the side bar rule be not entered within the first four days of term, unless some fatality has occurred. Gernon v. Gernon, Bl. D. & O. 111, Ex.

In an action of covenant the tender of a copy of the deed for oyer is not sufficient, and proceedings will be stayed till the original be produced. Sterne v. Mooney, Bl. D. & O. 235, Ex.

The court postponed a case-argued on behalf of the plaintiff upon the ground of the defendant's attorney having been suddenly summoned to London, upon the terms of the latter paying the costs of the day, and not charging them to his client. Church v. Dalton, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 355, C. P.

VI. SETTING ASIDE PROCeedings for
IRREGULARITY.

Writs and Declarations.]—In an action against two defendants who had appeared in different terms, and the declaration had been filed as of the term in which, and on the day before, the last appearance had been entered; the court set aside the proceedings for irregularity, the plaintiff not having entered a rule for liberty to file the declaration as of the subsequent term, and having filed the declaration previous to the last appearance. Mathers v. Coyle, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 280, Q. B.

An attorney being sued as an executor, and having voluntarily undertaken to file a plea as an attorney, the court refused a motion to set aside the declaration for want of a writ and appearance, with costs. Fahy v. Dillon, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 180, C. P.

The defendant was sued by the name of W. R. Gibson, he appeared by the name of W. P. Gibson. The plaintiff declared against him by the name in the writ, and obtained judgment for want of a plea. The court refused to set it aside on

account stated, with a promise by the defendant to pay the plaintiffs the monies "in the said last mentioned counts" specified. Plea, treating the declaration as coutaining but three counts. Whereon plaintiff entered a nolle prosequi as to the three counts to which the defendant pleaded, and marked judgment by default as to the remainder. Held, that the declaration contained but three counts, and the plaintiff, by his nolle prosequi, having put the case out of court, the judgment, and subsequent proceedings, were set aside. Wade v. Croker, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 514, Ex. [See Morrissey v. Walsh, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 293; Morse v. James, 11 M. & W.831; M.Gregor v. Graves, 18 L. Jour., N. S. 109, Ex.] Where an attorney's name is entered in the registry book of the residences of attornies practising in the court, though not an attorney of the court, and though the entry was made without his sanction or knowledge by a former partner of his, the court refused to set aside proceedings taken against him as an attorney of the court. Knaggs v. French, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 331, C. P.

The defendant having prosecuted under an order of the court, and convicted the process server of perjury, the court set aside the parliamentary appearance and all subsequent proceedings with costs, and the costs of obtaining the order to take the affidavit off the file. Fahie v. Nash, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 304, C. P. Where there is no cause in court and an affidavit without a stamp is filed, entitled as if in a cause in court, and a fiat obtained thereon, the proceedings will be set aside. Plunket v. Plunket, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 366, Q. B.

An affidavit in support of a motion to set aside the service of a writ was held to be defective in not stating the particular place in which the defendant was served, and for not negativing that he was served within the jurisdiction. Maguire v. Scott, 2 Ir. L, Rep. 224, Ex.

Semble, the Christian and surname of the attorney for the plaintiff should be signed in full at the foot of the English notice attached to the capias. Coffey v. Barrett, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 81, Q. B.

The copy of a serviceable capias must not vary from the original either in sound or sense. Spence v. Finn, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 476, Ex.

Pleas and Demurrers.]—In trespass for mesne profits, where there was a plea of the general issue, two pleas of liberum tenementum, and a plea of no property in the plaintiff, the court will order the latter to be taken off the file, being unnecessary. Jack v. Swift, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 7, Q. B.

Where an information in the nature of a quo warranto is brought in the name of the coroner at the relation of a private individual, to try the right of the defendant to hold the office of treasurer of the city of Dublin. Quære, can the defendant plead several pleas? Reg. v. Darley, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 334, Q. B.

Where a defendant pleads several pleas, in a case in which he is only entitled to plead one plea, can the objection be raised by demurrer, or is a motion to set them aside, as irregular, the proper course? Ib.

The defendant having demurred to the declaration, for not being properly entitled, the court would

not set aside the demurrer as frivolous. Alcock v. Holland, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 366, C. P.

The courts on some occasions have exercised a summary jurisdiction, in ordering objectionable pleas to be struck out; but I am not disposed to carry those decisions farther. Sims v. Thomas, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 420, Ex. [Per Brady, C. B.]

A defendant in an action of debt pleaded by mistake non assumpsit for nil debet. The plaintiff marked judgment for want of a plea, and refused on notice and consent to set it aside without costs. The court set aside the judgment with costs against the plaintiff. Boileau v. Homan, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 118, C. P.

Where a party under terms to plead issuably, pleads an informal plea, upon which the opposite party cannot safely take issue, the court will direct it to be taken off the file with costs. Graydon v. Kernan, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 121, C. P.

In an action of assumpsit containing a count upon a bill, and the money counts, the defendant demurred to the whole declaration, assigning special causes of demurrer to the first count, and pleaded the general issue to the money counts. The demurrer was set aside with costs. Warren v. Haughton, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 216, Ex. When a frivolous demurrer was filed on the last day of Trinity Term and a trial at the following assizes thereby lost, the court set it aside, and would not let the defendant in to plead. Scully v. O'Brien, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 14, Q. B.

VII. NOTICE OF TRIAL.

The 29th rule of the court, requiring a terms notice before going to trial, when the cause is three terms at issue, is not now acted on. Condon v. Condon, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 427, Q. B.

Piea, filed after the last day for pleading, and before judgment marked, is good, and notice of trial served on the last day for pleading, and for serving notice of trial-before plea pleaded, is regular. Doolan v. Dunne, Bl. D. & O. 40, Ex.

And under similar circumstances, if there be notice of trial served, the defendant will be made to accept short notice of trial. Byrne v. Jones, Bl. D. & O. 40, Ex.

Notice of trial served in anticipation of a plea on the last day for pleading will be deemed suffi cient, if the defendant plead issuably. Lowry v. Robinson, Bl. D. & O. 197, Ex.

VIII. POSTEA.

When the defendant has obtained a verdict, the plaintiff has no right to prevent him from moving on the postea, by lodging with the officer a sum sufficient for the payment of his costs, the defendant being entitled to have a judgment entered for him, as a protection against a future action. Perrin v. Hodgens, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 24, Ex.

When the jury in action of trespass, against several defendants, find, on first plea, general damages, and then apportion them between the defendants, such finding is good, and the court will treat the apportionment as surplusage. Kelly v. Dillon, Bl. D. & O. 267, Ex.