the 3 & 4 Vic. c. 105, s. 48, mean those which the defendant has raised on the pleadings. Ib. In an ejectment for non-payment of rent, the demise, by mistake laid prior to the day on which the right of entry accrued, was amended by the judge at Nisi Prius. Ottiwell v. Hamill, Bl. D. & O. 185-per Blackburne, C. J. Rule for Judgment.]-The court gave a conditional order to amend the rule for judgment entered on a wrong demise; cause to be shewn in ten days. Clifford v. Ejector, 1 Ir. Jur. 271, Ex. Judgment. The name in a bond and warrant on which judgment had been entered in 1817 was Mary Dowdal, in the judgment she was called Mary Dowd, the court in 1839 allowed the judgment to be amended. Lyster v. Campbell, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 294, Q.B. The court allowed a judgment to be amended on consent of the parties, by increasing the amount, it being entered the term previous to the application, and being for a small sum. Farrell v. Russell, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 40, Ex. The court granted a conditional order to amend by altering the surnames of both conusor and conusee from Brien to Bryan, they being properly named in the bond and warrant. Brien v. Brien, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 203, Q. B. In 1844 the court gave liberty to amend a judg ment of 1815 by changing it from a judgment de bonis propriis to a judgment de bonis testatoris, and by filling a blank in the remission of damages on the record by inserting the words "last four" before the word "counts," and by inserting the words "first four" in the statement of the counts on which the damages were recovered. Gower v. Monks & Ir. L. Rep. 343, C. P. A special memorandum contained in a warrant of attorney will be allowed to be added to a judg 8 ment. Hilton v. Lord Charleville, & Ir. L. Rep. 2, Q. B. The court as of course amended a judgment in which the name of the plaintiff was mistaken, there being documents to amend by. O'Connell v.O'Com nor, Bl. D. & O. 95, Ex. The court will amend the judgment roll by insert The court will not permit a judgment to being in the blank left for that purpose the amount of amended unless it be shewn that it can be done taxed costs, if the judgment be not registered purwithout prejudice to intervening creditors. Greene suant to the 7 & 8 Vic. c. 90. Bank of Ireland v. Orpen, 1 Ir. Jur. 206, Ex. v. Richardson, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 89, Ex. Where the judgment was entered in a wrong Christian name of the conusor, the plaintiff was permitted to vacate the old judgment and enter a new one. Ib. The court will not allow a judgment to be amended by increasing the amount from the principal to the penalty of the bond, though all parties consent, a new judgment must be entered. Cromie v. Brown, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 219, C. P. The memorial of the assignment of a judgment may be amended in the name of the assignee, though there be nothing to amend by, upon affidavit shewing the applicant to be the person to whom it was intended that the judgment should have been assigned. King v. Yelman, 2 Jon. 39. Judgment amended, by altering the name of the conusor from Charles Stewart Corry, to Thomas Charles Stewart Corry. Murland v. Corry, 2 Jon. 465. Though the court have the power to make an amendment they will not do so except it be clearly Postea.]-Where a defendant paid money into for the advancement of justice. So where a judg-court, and the plaintiff obtained a verdict for a less ment was obtained on a scire facias issued in Hilary sum, the court gave liberty to amend the postea. Term, 1841, and in Trinity Term following judg- Harly v. Parker, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 455, Q. B. ment was given for the plaintiff on a plea of nul tiel record to the assignment of the judgment. After writ of error brought on account of the alleged defects in the assignment, the court refused to allow the record to be amended by setting out the assignment of the judgment verbatim. Fulton v. Creagh, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 275, Q. B. Where a judgment was entered by an administrator on a bond and warrant executed to the supposed intestate, which administration was revoked, and probate granted to an executrix, the court refused to allow the judgment to be amended by substituting the executrix for the administrator, but allowed a new judgment to be entered as of the present Term in the name of the executrix, and vacated the former judgment. Archer v. Coote, 5 Ir. L. R. 96, C. P. The court after the term in which the judgment had been signed, after a writ of error had been argued in the Exchequer Chamber, and another sued to the House of Lords, amended the judgment roll by filling, with the amount of taxed costs, a left for their insertion. Irish Society v. the Bishop of Derry, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 236, C. P. blauk An amendment of the judgment roll will be allow. ed by altering the surname of the conusee. vey v. Rice, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 593, Q. B. Han This motion need not be made within the first four days of term. Ib. A motion to amend the postea should be made within the first four days of the term succeeding the verdict. Regina v. O'Connell, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 337, Q. B. Record-after writ of error.Where the verdict was given upon the substantial issues, and no finding appeared on the record as to two formal issues, the court, after judgment pronounced, and before the return of the transcript, amended the record by entering a verdict in conformity with the evidence in the bill of exceptions. Quin v. National Insur ance Company, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 37, Ex. The application to amend the record should be made in the first instance to the court below, and subsequently to the Court of Error to amend the transcript. Ib. The court will not allow a plaintiff in error to amend his assignment of errors after special demurrer, where the amendment does not tend to the for therance of justice. Roddy v. Clements, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 229, Ex. Subsequently to the pronouncing of judgment is the Court of Error, an amendment in the postea was allowed to be made by the court in which the cause Warrants of attorney in the usual English form to originated. O'Connell v. Mansfield, 9 Ir. L. Rep. enter judgments in the King's Bench in Ireland were 440, C. P. also prepared in Ireland, and executed by the resThe plaintiff having in Trinity Term, 1844, ob-pective parties at the same times, and the same tained a judgment for £100 damages, and six pence costs, a writ of error was sued out, and a transcript of the record sent to the Court of Exchequer Chamber, blanks being left in the record and transcript, for the costs-not then ascertained-and the consolidated sum of damages, expenses and costs. The places as the deeds respectively. Held, that these contracts were English, and void for want of regis. try, under the provisions of the English Annuity Act, 53, Geo. 3, c. 141, s. 2. Ferguson v. Lomax, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 81, C. P. judgment having been affirmed in Trinity Term, APPEAL-See CERTIORARI, CIVIL BILL, QUAR 1845, and the transcript subsequently remitted to this court, and the costs taxed, the court, in Hilary Term, 1847, ordered the record and transcript to be amended by the insertion therein of the amount of costs, and of the consolidated sum of damages, expenses, and costs in the blanks left for that purpose. Ryan v. Shee, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 276, Ex. S. C. 8 Ir. L. Rep. 268. Sheriff's returns.]-See SHERIFF. Order of Court.]-The court will not permit a conditional order to be amended. Bryan v. Camp bell, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 408, Q. B. Au order to set aside a verdict generally, omitted to mention costs, the plaintiff having succeeded on a second trial the officer gave him the costs of both. Held, that on a motion to review the taxation the court would not correct the former order, the course to be adopted was to apply to amend. Rush v. Purcell, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 379, Q.B. ANNUITY-See DEED. By annuity deeds executed in the years 1829 and 1831 respectively after reciting a devise in 1844 of an annuity of £50 to C. C. charged upon lands in Ireland, and payable half-yearly on the 1st of Nov. and 1st of May, and also the marriage of C. C. to J. L. in 1827, and the settlement thereupon of the said annuities in trustees for the separate use of C. C, and an agreement by the said J. L. and his said wife for the sale of two annuities of the value of £23 1s. 6d. each, to be secured by these covenants, by assignments of the said annuity of £50 by the wife, and by warrants of attorney to confess judg. ment in the King's Bench in Ireland for £500 respectively-it was witnessed in one of the deeds that in consideration of £200 lawful money of Great Britain-and in the other deed that in consideration of £200 of lawful money of Great Britain current En England, the said J. L. and his wife respectively covenanted to pay to the grantee the said annuities by yearly payments on the 1st of November, and the 1st of May respectively, including the respective proportional parts between the last day of payment, or the day of the date of the deed, and the death of he wife; and also to assign policies of insurance for her life in some English office to the grantee; and by the same deeds the wife appointed the grantee o be her attorney to recover the said annuity. These Heeds were prepared in Ireland, and upon Irish Stamps, and transmitted to England, where they were executed by the grantors who resided there, and where also the consideration-money was paid; but they were executed by the grantee in Dublin, f which place he was described in both deeds. TER SESSIONS. APPORTIONMENT-See LANDLORD AND TENANT (RENT.) APOTHECARY-See MANDAMUS. In an action of debt for a penalty under the 31 Geo. 3, c. 37, held to be sufficient to aver in the declaration, that the defendant did practise the art and mystery of an apothecary, without stating the particular acts done, and that it need not be averred that the defendant practised the art and mystery of an apothecary for profit or gain. Apothecaries' Hall v. Calvert, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 186, Q. B. A person elected by the trustees or committee of a fever hospital, to be apothecary thereto, and compounding drugs for the patients in such hospital, does not subject himself to the penalties inflicted by the 31 Geo. 3, c. 34, for practising as an apothecary without a certificate. Governors of Apothecaries' Hall, v. Nichols, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 390, Q.B. APPLOTMENT-See PARISH CESS, TITHE COMPOSITION. ARRAY-See JURY. ARBITRATION. Submission.-Where a witness to a deed of submission refused to verify the deed by affidavit, the court held the rule requiring the affidavit not to be inflexible, and the deed was made a rule of court without it. Shortall v. Moran, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 87, C. P. It is good cause against making an award a rule of court, that the submission to refer is not in writing, and it lies upon the party applying to shew it was in writing. Goulding v. Goulding, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 164, Q. B. Either party may revoke his submission before it be made a rule of court. Ib. By submission it was referred to arbitrators “to declare what amount might be the profits to be derived by defendant from the expenditure of plaintiff, with allowance for ditching and draining, as well as all buildings and manure, so as to extend its benefits to any future crop." The arbitrators awarded "that the defendant should give plaintiff £107 7s. on account of profits calculated to accrue to defendant from plaintiff's improvements; that defendant give plaintiff the use of the dwelling house and offices to the 1st of May next; that on that day plaintiff give up to defendant possession arbitration made in a cause, is unnecessary. Yet, of said premises, leaving them in the same repair when the terms of the deed of submission are, that as at present. Held, that the portion of the award the decision of the arbitrators should be made the relating to the possession of the premises was bad, judgment of the court, a motion for an order to not being warranted by the submission, but that it enter up judgment is necessary. Williams v. Bruen, was separable from the residue, and that the award 1 Ir. L. Rep. 344, Q.B. for the amount of the improvements was good. Murphy v. Bellew, 4 Ir. L. Rep., 313, Ex. A subscribing witness to the execution of a deed of submission to arbitration, under the 10 Wm. 3, c. 14, although there is no cause in court, will, upon refusal to verify his attestation by affidavit, be ordered to do so on pain of attachment, and to pay the costs of the motion to compel the execution. Nugent v. Lowe, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 3, C. P., S. C. BI. D. & O. 220. It is not open to such a witness declining to verify his attestation to justify his refusal, on the ground that the time has elapsed within which the submission should have been entered as a rule of court. Ib. Quære, whether upon such refusal, there being no cause before the court, it has jurisdiction to dispense with the production of the affidavit to verify, and to enter the submission as a rule of court. Ib. Where a matter is referred to arbitration, and complicated matters of law and equity are involved therein, fees to counsel for perusing and settling the deed of submission will be allowed on the taxation of the costs, between party and party. In reBooth, 1 Ir. Jur. 68. C. P. Reference to.]-On an application to confirm the Master's report on a reference respecting the amendment on the record of revivor of a judgment, the court has jurisdiction to refer the whole matter to an arbitrator, if that course be more likely to do justice than if left to a jury. Cruise v. Davies, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 363, C. P. Award.]-Where arbitrators assessed certain damages, being the amount of several bills of costs due to the attorney by his client, subject to be reduced by taxation, the award was held good. Gower v. Donovan, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 40, Q. B. Where the parties to an action referred the matter in dispute to arbitration, and agreed that judgment should be entered for the sum awarded, and the defendant after the award would not sign a plea of confession for the amount awarded, the court ordered judgment to be entered up for the sum awarded, and directed that he should pay the costs of the motion. French v. Farrell, 6 Ír. L. Rep. 151, Ex. Enlarging time for making Award. The court has jurisdiction, under the 3 & 4 Vic. 105, s. 63, to enlarge the time for arbitrators, making their award after the term has expired, even though the deed of submission contain a clause empowering the arbitrators to extend the time from time to time. Macneil v. Macneil, 1 Ir. Jur. 16, Ex. Enforcing.]-To obtain executions under the 3 & 4 Vic. cap. 105, sec. 27, for a sum of money awarded, the party seeking it must move for an order Nisi on the opposite party to pay, which being made absolute, gives the court jurisdiction. Kelly v. St. George, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 420, C. P. Witnesses at.]-The application for a rule to compel the attendance of witnesses before an arbitrator, under 3 & 4 Vic. c. 100, who had been ap pointed by an order of Nisi Prius, should be made to a single judge. to a single judge. O'Connor v. Balfe, 3. It. L. Rep. 66., C. P. Costs.]-A cause in the Court of Common Pleas, and cross cause in the Court of Exchequer, in the latter the matter was referred at Nisi Prius by a consent which was made a rule of court, the parties delivered blank pleas of confession to the arbitrator, who filled up the blank plea of confession signed by the defendant, on which judgment had been entered up in the Common Pleas; this court ordered the officer to tax the costs of the cause and of the reference, although the consent had never been made a rule of the court. Moran v. Troy, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 468, C. P. By an order of Nisi Prius, a case was referred to arbitration, it having been consented that a verdict should be taken for the plaintiff for the sum claimed by him, "with costs, subject to be reduced or turned into a verdict for the defendant, with costs, according to the finding or award of the By consent between plaintiff and defendant, all arbitrators." The award reduced the amount so matters in dispute were referred to arbitration; the entered for the plaintiff, but was silent on the sub-consent was afterwards made a rule of court, and ject of costs. Held, that the plaintiff was entitled to the costs of the reference, and of the award, in addition to the costs of the action. Fairbrother v. Earl of Kingston, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 268, Ex. If a cause at Nisi Prius have been referred to arbitration, and, in consequence of any default, the proceedings on the arbitration are nugatory, the party ultimately successful cannot recover the costs of the arbitration proceedings, unless such have been expressly provided for by the deed of submission. O'Driscoll v. M'Cartney, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 570, Ex. Entering Judgment upon.]-Though a motion a sum awarded to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff, together with the costs of the award and of the reference; the award and order to confirm same having been registered, pursuant to the 3 & 4 Vic. c. 105, s. 28; the court ordered the defendant to pay the sum awarded, together with the taxed costs, but doubted whether the plaintiff was entitled to issue execution under the 27th sec. for the sum awarded. Feeny v. Dillon, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 503, Ex. ARREST See EXECUTION, BAIL, AFFIDAVIT, to confirm an award, on an order of reference to Privileged Persons.]-A salaried clerk, in one of the offices of the courts, is privileged from arrest when on his way to court to attend his office duties. Ex parte Egan, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 87, Q. B. Upon an application to be discharged, under the Mutiny Act, it must be clearly and explicitly shewn that the party applying was a soldier, duly enlisted at the time of the arrest, and that such arrest was contrary to the intent of the Act. The provisions of which are to be strictly construed. Pounder v. Booth, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 34, Ex. A defendant arrested under a writ out of one of the superior courts, was discharged on entering a common appearance, upon the ground that his goods had been seized under an attachment from the Lord Mayor and Sheriff's Court, for the same cause of action, and that the proceedings in that court were for the same cause of action. Daniel v. Daniel, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 374, Ex. Where a person by his proceedings in one court has obtained a security for his demand, he shall not after arrest the defendant for the same cause of action. Ib. A party to an Equity suit is not privileged from arrest while attending a commission to examine witnesses in the cause. M'Carthy v. Lowry, 2 Jon. 776. A party who attended at the Master's office to execute leases, on leaving was arrested under a ca. sa. held that he was entitled to be discharged on the ground of privilege, although he remained in prison for a fortnight after his arrest, without making any application. Wheeler v. Fox, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 302, note. A party who resides in the country, but who is in attendance in Dublin as a witness in the Prerogative Court, is protected from arrest during the whole time he remains in town, bona fide, for the purpose of being examined. M'Donnell v. Gray, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 509, Ex. Where an attorney applied to be discharged from arrest on an affidavit, stating that he had been attending professionally on the 5 and 6th of January at the Quarter Sessions Court, when, amongst other matters, he was engaged for the traverser in a crown case; that the trial stood over till the 7th of January, on the morning of which day, "immediately before the sitting of the court, and as deponent was going in the direction thereof," he was arrested on a ca sa. Held that the affidavit was defective in not stating that the defendant was going to court, on his professional business, at the time of the arrest. Scott v. Frayne, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 41, Ex. A party summoned before a magistrate, on a criminal charge, is not privileged from arrest on his return home from attendance on the summons. Johnson v. M'Donnell, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 594, Q. B. A coroner, when engaged in the discharge of his official duty, is privileged from arrest; and the heriff having notice of his being so engaged, and rresting him notwithstanding, was obliged to pay he costs of his discharge. Callaghan v. Twiss, 9 r. L. Rep. 422, C. P. Semble, an assistant barrister is privileged from rrest, as well during the exercise of his civil, as of is criminal jurisdiction; and the privilege will ttach, though he should arrive in the county on the day preceding that appointed for holding the sessions. Molloy v., 10 Ir. L. Rep. 14, C. P. The officers of the Queen's Bench have no general privilege of exemption from arrest on final process; their privilege only extends to the periods during which they are going to, returning from, or engaged in their official duties. Magrath v. Cooper, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 332, Q. B., S. C. Bl. D. & O. 141. A person summoned from a distant part of the country, to attend before a Master in Chancery, is privileged from arrest upon civil process; not merely while attending at the Master's chambers, and going and returning therefrom, but alone during his stay in town, in pursuance of the summons. Rooney v. Cooke, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 469, Ex. Where a party was in custody on a criminal charge which was abandoned, but immediately on being liberated from the dock he was taken in execution by the sheriff, upon a writ issued at the suit of the plaintiff, who had no connection with the prosecutor in the criminal case. Held that he was not privileged from arrest. Buckmaster v. Cox, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 101, Ex. Secus, if there had been collusion between the plaintiff and prosecutor. Ib. Where a person is in custody of the sheriff, upon a criminal charge, it is not necessary to obtain an order of the court for the sheriff to detain him in a civil suit. Ib. Where an officer of the court has been arrested upon a ca. sa. and seeks to be discharged upon the ground of privilege, he must satisfy the court that his application is made bonâ fide, and if any circumstances are disclosed to lead the court to think it otherwise, it will refuse his application. In re 3 Ir. L. Rep. 301, Q. B. Such an application must be made without delay, therefore where it appeared that the defendant was arrested upon the 11th of January, and did not apply until the 28th, held that the laches was decisive against the motion. Ib. Affidavit.]-An affidavit to hold to bail, stating that defendant was indebted to the plaintiff "in the sum of £20, besides interest, being the amount of a bill of exchange, dated and drawn by F. H. on accepted by the defendant, payable at 91 days after date, which bill was passed to the plaintiff for valuable consideration, is insufficient. M'Carthy v. Birney, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 39, Q. B. delivered to the defendant, or for his use, and by his An affidavit to hold to bail for goods sold and order, is sufficient. "For money paid, laid out, and expended to and for the defendant, and for his use," without adding "at his request," is defective. Hughes v. Dowd, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 24, Ex. An affidavit to hold to bail, by an administrator, for rent "due upon, and by virtue of a lease, bearing date, &c., and made between the deceased of the one part, and J. M. (the defendant) of the other;" without stating that J. M. held and enjoyed under the lease, was held to be sufficient. Galvin v. Milligan, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 23, Ex. An affidavit to hold to bail by one of two plaintiffs, stating that one, W. P., (the defendant,) "was indebted to H. G., deponent's late partner, in the sum of £158 for goods sold and delivered by the said H. G., and the deponent, during their late partnership, to and for W. P., and, at his request, was held to be sufficient. Horwood v. Power, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 203, Ex. An affidavit to hold to bail, in an action by the indorsee, against the acceptor of a bill of exchange, must state the indorsement to the plaintiff. Tuthill v. Bridgeman, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 62, Ex. obtained for the arrest of a party was filed without having any stamp upon it, no cause being then pend. ing between the parties, the court set aside the flat, and ordered that the bail bond, executed by the de fendant and his sureties, should be delivered up to be cancelled, upon his entering a common appearance. Plunket v. Plunket, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 366, Q. B. Quære, must an action be commenced before a fiat can be obtained? Ib. The affidavit to hold to bail cannot be amended when the interests of third parties are involved, and between the original parties no amendment will be allowed unless there be something to amend by. Johnston v. Pothonier, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 25, Q. B. An affidavit to hold to bail, giving only the initials of the defendant's Christian name, is insufficient. Chaffers v. Bingham, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 242, Q.B. An affidavit to hold to bail stating that W. R., the defendant, was indebted to the deponent in £21 11s. as the bearer of a certain check drawn by W. R. on R. R., which said check was given unto this deponent for value received by the said R. R. in diet, washing, &c. provided by deponent for the said R. R. at his request, and made payable to bearer, the pay-upon which it was grounded stating that the defen ment of which had been refused by the said R. R. Held to be insufficient. Cleary v. Ramsay, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 243, Ex. Affidavits on behalf of the defendant under the 6th section of the 3 & 4 Vic. c. 105, should negative any intention of leaving the country. Knipe v. McCabe, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 24, C. P. A party will not be discharged from custody who has been arrested under a fiat when he qualifies his swearing as to his having no intention of quitting the country, and there are circumstances in the case which sustain the belief that he has an intention of leaving the country. Hughes v. Ryan, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 107, Q.B. Where an affidavit on which a fiat is sought states on belief that the defendant is about to quit the country, the grounds of belief should be accurately stated, and where the fiat was obtained on such an affidavit, and the defendant arrested, the court on an affidavit stating that he did not intend to leave the country, discharged him. Hughes v. Creswell, (3 Ir. L. Rep. 108 Q. B.) Held also that an application to set aside the fiat, and not the order upon which it issued, was sufficiently formal. Ib. An affidavit that the defendant was about to leave Ireland, unless, &c. was held to be sufficient to obtain a judge's fiat to arrest him. Ryan v. Ryan, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 200, Q. B. Repeated declarations by the defendant that he would leave the country to avoid payment of his debt, though made in moments of irritation, were held to be sufficient probable cause to hold the defendant to bail.-Perrin, J. dissentiente. Ib. Semble, the plaintiff in shewing cause against a conditional order for the discharge of the defendant must rely on his affidavit to hold to bail, and cannot use additional affidavits. Ib. Where the defendant relies on a counter affidavit, in support of an application to set aside a judge's order under which he has been arrested, the plaintiff may make an affidavit in reply. Farrell v. Maguire, 3 Ir. L. Rep, 349, Ex. The affidavit to ground an application for a discharge must deny positively the averments in the plaintiff's affidavit on which the fiat was granted. Innes v. Waters, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 311, C. P. Where the affidavit upon which a fiat had been Semble, a mistake in the name of the defendant in an affidavit to hold to bail is a substantial defect, and cannot be treated as an irregularity. Ib. A fiat for an arrest was set aside, the affidavit dant was about to leave the county instead of the country. Bailey v. Bailey, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 137, Ex. The plaintiff's affidavit to obtain a fiat need not state a positive belief as to the truth of the defen dant's being about to leave the country, provided the facts be such as would lead the mind of the judge to that conclusion. Ib. As to the practice in obtaining a fiat for the arrest of the defendant. Ib. An affidavit to hold the defendant to bail should be precise as to the sum due. Ruttle v. Downes, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 364, Q, B. When the affidavit stated that the deponent was informed that the defendant was about to leave the country, the person from whom the information was obtained should be stated, and an affidavit made by him, or an excuse for its non-production. Ib. A plaintiff on a motion to set aside a fiat will not be allowed to read an affidavit in explanation of, or to supply the deficiencies in the affidavit upon which the fiat has been granted. 1b. An affidavit for the arrest or detention of a defendant under the 2nd section of the 3 & 4 Vic. c. 105, must state the belief that the defendant is about to quit Ireland, unless he be forthwith apprehended, and must also state the facts upon which such belief is founded. Hooke v. Duke de Rovigo, 3 Ir. L.Rep. 51, Ex. An allegation by the plaintiff that the defendant admitted himself to have been guilty of the crime of forgery, and that he believes if released he will abscond, is sufficient cause against a conditional order to be discharged from custody under the 3 & 4 Vic c. 105, s. 6, though the defendant swears he had no intention to leave the country. Knipe v. M'Cabe, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 66, C. P. An affidavit for a judge's fiat to arrest need not be made according to the strict rules of legal evidence, and statements made on hearsay and belief will be sufficient. Hickey v. Moore, (4 Ir. L. Rep. 468, Q. B.-Perrin, J. dissentiente. The affidavit on which a judge's order for the defendant's arrest was obtained, stated, “that there were probable causes for believing that defendant was about so leave the country." Held to be insuf ficient. Solomon v. Digby, Bl. D. & O. 188. Without probable cause.]-An arrest, without |