failing to satisfy the judge as aforesaid, that the cause be remitted for trial before a county court to be therein named; and thereupon the plaintiff shall lodge the original writ and the order with the registrar of such county court, who shall appoint a day for the hearing of the cause, notice whereof shall be sent by post or otherwise by the registrar to both parties or their attorneys; and the county court so named shall have all the same powers and jurisdiction with respect to the cause as if both parties had agreed, by a memorandum signed by them, that the said county court should have power to try the said action, and the same had been commenced by plaint in the said county court: and the costs of the parties, in respect of the proceedings subsequent to the order of the judge of the superior court shall be allowed according to the scale of costs in use in the county courts, and the costs of the proceedings in the superior courts shall be allowed according to the scale in use in such latter court." As to the retrospective operation of this section, which came into operation on the 1st of January, 1868, see Wood v. Riley (L. R. 3 C. P. 26), and C. L. P. Act, 1860, s. 34, n. (ante, p. 323). See generally upon the subject of security for costs, Chit. Arch. Prac. 12th ed. index, title "Security for Costs:" and see Whitall v. Campbell, ubi supra, where it was held that a former servant of the East India Company, whose services had been transferred to the crown by virtue of the 21 & 22 Vict. c. 106, was, while in India on such service, exempt from giving security for costs upon suing here; also Chapple v. Watts, ubi supra, where it was held that an officer, not shown to have any residence in England, and who was a native of Ireland, and serving with his regiment there, was not exempt from being compelled to give security for costs in an action brought by him, inasmuch as it did not appear that he was removed out of the jurisdiction by the orders of the crown. A defendant residing abroad who has brought error, and has not put in bail in error, may be required to give security for costs (Hill v. Fox, 3 H. & N. 547). See as to security for costs under "The Joint Stock Companies' Act, 1857," s. 24 (Australian Steam Ship Company v. Fleming, 4 Kay & J. 407). In the case of joint stock companies with limited liability, provision is made for security for costs by the Companies' Act, 1862, s. 69, infra.† DISCONTINUANCE. 23. To entitle a plaintiff to discontinue after plea pleaded, it shall not be necessary to obtain the defendant's consent, but the rule shall contain the undertaking on the part of the plaintiff to pay the costs, and a consent that if they are not paid within four days This refers to 19 & 20 Vict. c, 108, s. 23. "Where a limited company is plaintiff or pursuer in any action, suit or other legal proceeding, any judge having jurisdiction in the matter may, if it appears by any credible testimony that there is reason to believe that if the defendant be successful in his defence the assets of the company will be insufficient to pay his costs, require sufficient security to be given for such costs, and may stay all proceedings until such security is given." Ante, p. 7. after taxation defendant shall be at liberty to sign judgment of non pros. If the plaintiff does not pay the costs, the defendant may sign judgment of non pros. Where, under the former practice, the defendant moved for judgment as in case of a nonsuit, the court discharged the rule (Cooper v. Holloway, 1 Hodg. 76); and in a case where the plaintiff, instead of paying the costs, took the cause to trial and got a verdict, the court refused to disturb it (Edgington v. Proudman, 1 Dowl. 152). See as to costs upon a discontinuance after an abortive trial, Daniel v. Wilkin (8 Ex. 156; L. J. 22, Ex. 73). STAYING PROceedings. 24. In any action against an acceptor of a bill of exchange, or the maker of a promissory note, the defendant shall be at liberty to stay proceedings on payment of the debt and costs in that action only. See Smith v. Woodcock (4 T. R. 691). COGNOVIT; WARRANT OF ATTORNEY; JUDGE'S 25. No judgment shall be signed upon any cognovit or any warrant of attorney without such cognovit or warrant being delivered to and filed by the Master, who is hereby ordered to file the same in the order in which it is received. See Cooper v. Grant (12 C. B. 154). An action does not lie upon a warrant of attorney (Sherborn v. Lord Huntingtower, 13 C. B. N. S. 742), nor upon a judge's order, even though made by consent, where the order gives a particular remedy for enforcing the order, e. g. by issuing execution (Hookpayton v. Bussell, 10 Exch. 24; L. J. 23, Ex. 267; and see Thames Iron Works Company v. Patent Derrick Company, 1 J. & H. 93; L. J. 29, Ch. 714); but an action may be maintained on a judge's order of reference, made by consent, this being evidence of an agreement between the parties to perform the award (Lievesley v. Gilmore, L. R. 1, C. P. 570). 26. Leave to enter up judgment on a warrant of attorney above one and under ten years old, is to be obtained by order of a judge made ex parte, and if ten years old or more, upon a summons to show cause. alive within a reaWhere the defen(Johnson v. Fry, 5 It must be shown that the defendant was sonable time (Stocks v. Willes, 5 Dowl. 221). dant is abroad, greater latitude is allowed Dowl. 215). See, for circumstances under which leave may be refused, Sherborn v. Lord Huntingtower (11 W. R. 145, Q. B. M. T. 1862). 27. Every attorney or other person who shall prepare any warrant of attorney to confess judgment which is to be subject to any defeasance, shall cause such defeasance to be written on the same paper or parchment on which the warrant is written, or cause a memorandum in writing to be made on such warrant, containing the substance and effect of such defeasance. 28. The costs of filing a judge's order for judgment against a trader defendant under the Bankrupt Act, shall not be allowed unless specially ordered by the judge. EVIDENCE; ADMISSION AND INSPECTION OF DOCU- 102. 29. The form of notice to admit documents referred Ante, pp. 101, to in the Common Law Procedure Act, 1852, section 117, may be as follows: In the Q. B. or Excheq.) A. B. v. C. D. • Defendant duce in evidence the several Take notice, that the documents hereunder specified, and that the same may be inspected by the Defendant Plaintiff } his attorney or agent at Defendant tween the hours of ; and the Plaintiff within 48 hours from the last-mentioned hour, to admit that such of the said documents as are specified to be originals were respectively written, signed, or executed, as they purport respectively to have been; that such as are specified as copies, are true copies; and such documents as are stated to have been served, sent, or delivered, were so served, sent, or delivered respectively, saving all just exceptions to the admissibility of all such documents as evidence in this cause. Dated, &c. To E. F., Attorney G. H., Attorney [or " Agent" for {Defendant. } [or " Agent"] for {Defendant} [Here describe the documents, the manner of doing which may be as follows:] 1st part, &c................ Date. 1st January, 1848. 1st February, 1848. 2nd February, 1848. 1st March, 1848. Letter, defendant to plaintiff.. ..... 1st January, 1848. 1st May, 1849. Copies. Description of Documents. Dates. Original or Duplicate, served, sent, or delivered, when, how, and by whom. Ante, p. 102. The form given by this rule is similar to that given by the rule H. T. 4 Will. 4. It is applicable only to documents in the custody or under the control of the party giving the notice; but if the notice is intended to apply to other documents it may be varied accordingly, and the party giving it may, "if necessary, insert a special clause stating his inability, for such and such reasons, to give an inspection of the documents" (per Rolfe, B., Rutter v. Chapman, 8 M. & W. 388, 394, cited ante, p. 102). 30. In all cases of trials, writs of inquiry, or inquisitions of any kind, either party may call on the other party, by notice, to admit documents in the manner provided by and subject to the provisions of the Common Law Procedure Act, 1852; and in case of the refusal or neglect to admit after such notice given, the costs of proving the document shall be paid by the party so neglecting or refusing, whatever the result of the cause may be; unless at the trial or inquisition the judge or presiding officer shall certify that the refusal to admit was reasonable; and no costs of proving any document shall be allowed unless such notice be given, except in cases where the omission to give the notice is, in the opinion of the Master, a saving of expense. 31. An order upon the lord of a manor to allow the Ante, p. 254. usual limited inspection of the court rolls, on the application of a copyhold tenant, may be absolute in the first instance, upon an affidavit that the copyhold tenant has applied for and been refused inspection. As to the former practice, see R. v. Shelley (3 T. R. 141). As to unlimited inspection of the court rolls, see Warrick v. Queen's College, Oxford (L. R. 3 Ex. 683); and as to payment of steward's fees for such inspection, see Hoare v. Wilson (L. R. 4 Ex. 1). 32. No subpoena for the production of an original record shall be issued, unless a rule of court or the order of a judge shall be produced to the officer issuing the same, and filed with him, and unless the writ shall be made conformable to the description of the document mentioned in such rule or order. 262. 33. All depositions of witnesses taken under the Ante, pp. 249, order of a judge, rule of court, or writ of commission, shall be returned to and filed in the office of the masters of the court in which the action or proceeding is pending. TRIAL, NOTICE OF TRIAL, AND INQUIRY. 34. Notice of trial or inquiry, and of continuance of Ante, p. 89. trial or inquiry, shall be given in town; but countermand of notice of trial or inquiry may be given either in town or country, unless otherwise ordered by the court or a judge. The frequency of resort to writs of trial seems to justify the insertion here of the statutory enactments concerning them. 3 & 4 WILL. 4, c. 42. An Act for the further Amendment of the Law, and the better Advancement of Justice. 3 & 4 Will. 5, c. 42. Sec. 17. Section 17. That in any action depending in any of the said superior courts for any debt or demand in which the sum sought to Power to di |