case anonymous of the eighth month in court Lord keeper Eq can ab pl S c if  one of the party after publication pass have a order to examine upon the usual  affidavit the other party may not only crossexamine but examine at large upon  a motion for leave to examine after publication upon make the usual oath of  not have see the deposition the Lord keeper declare that in such a case the  other side shall be at liberty to examine at large as well as to crossexamine  the witness produce by the party that make the motion which be all he may do  former and his reason be that a crafty solicitor may lie in the lurch and  examine nothing till after publication be pass and the other party may think  himself secure and so not examine to those point which he can otherwise have  prove in regard he find his adversary have not examine to those matter and  when once publication be pass and the party that examine have see his own  deposition then the side that lie still have tie up his adversary so that he  can only crossexamine the other witness apply for a order upon the usual  affidavit to enlarge publication and when he have get that order then he come  in with a whole cloud of witness and though it may be think hard that any one  shall have liberty to examine after he have see the deposition yet his  lordship think it a reasonable penalty on such as will not examine in time or  that shall lie upon the catch to Vernon chancery case take Vernon chancery  case er p advantage of the other party and order the register to take notice  of it as a fix rule for the future And where the defendant after publication  examine a witness and then conceive himself irregular on the usual affidavit  get a order to reexamine and the witness die before reexamination the  defendant may make use of the first deposition Copeland v Stanton p wms so  where bill by husband and wife and witness examine and publication passes on  the death of the husband and new bill for the same matter by second husband  same witness may be examine anon post vol by where by the death of husband no  abatement and the wife inheritance not in the case shelberry v Briggs and all  post vol et by in a bill bring to have the benefit of a former decree Johnson  and ux v sir b Northey ibidem et vide where under the circumstance a new set  of interrogatory be allow to be settle before the master after publication the  former be suppress as lead Spencer v Allen pre Ch corporation of Sutton  Coldfield v Wilson Vernon chancery case er report date case corporation de  Sutton COLDFIELD versus wilson of the eighth month in court Lord keeper Eq can  ab pl S c whether a member of a corporation may be a witness for the  corporation the question be whether a bind of pound penalty be intend for the  benefit of the corporation or of the defendant and the witness for the  plaintiff be all member of the corporation it be object that they can not be  read they swear for their own benefit which exception be allow as good if a  corporation will examine any of their member as witness they must and so be  the course disfranchise they mayor and alderman of Colchester v p wms and the  Lord keeper say a corporation ought to have a townclerk and underclerks that  be not freeman that they may be competent witness upon occasion and he say he  think it very hard in the case of the waterbailage of London that no one  freeman of the city though it be not sixpence concern to he can be admit as a  witness but there indeed the fee be in question and here be only a bare sum of  pound in dispute he think that not considerable enough to take off a man  testimony If a corporation will examine any of their member as witness they  must and so be the course disfranchise they mayor and alderman of Colchester v  p wms but the case where the party be concern in interest though never so  small have always prevail Dodswell v not post vol so parishioner no good  evidence to prove a charity give to a parish attorneygeneral v Wyurgh and all  p wms by if only a lodger and one that do not pay to the poor ibidem and so be  the common case upon a appeal from a rate at the quarter session and say it be  usual inconsiderable legacy to a man where a man be a legatee if it be a as S  or pound to a man of quality that he shall nevertheless be a witness to prove  the will Vide Anstey v dowsing stram and now it be establish that legatee and  devisees of land be in all case to be witness competent to prove a will but  that the legacy or devise shall be void stat Geo cap and that creditor be full  competent even though the land be charge with the payment of debt vide Wyndham  v chetwynd burr Rep command cap p et vide Baugh v Holloway p wms and note  there pike v crouch raym Lord Camden in his argument in the case of do on they  of Henman v Hersey hill incline to think that this practice cease on the pass  the statute of fraud at length it appear that the defendant have crossexamined  some of the plaintiff witness not only to question bare whether they be of the  corporation or not but to other question which tend to the merit of the cause  the Lord keeper declare that make they good witness though they be member of  the corporation and upon their evidence it be decree for the plaintiff Vernon  chancery case er p