case trefusis versus sir hind cotton lady cotton all at the chancellor house  Lord chancellor Mr attorneygeneral for the defendant on a bill bring by the  now defendant lady cotton she be decree the benefit of her marriage settlement  Ant Cas unless the defendant trefusis within six month after he come of age  shall show cause to the contrary Mr trefusis come of age and he and his sister  file their bill to discover whether the defendant lady cotton do not agree to  waive the benefit of her marriage article on Mr trefusis settle her father  personal estate in trust for her sole and separate use and to be relieve  against the say settlement and to have a account and distribution of their  father personal estate the defendant put in a full answer to the discovery and  deny all fraud and imposition and plead the marriage settlement and the decree  to the relief seek by Mr trefusis a decree can be vary or alter by a new bill  and this be a absolute decree ab beginning if the infant when he come of age  can show good cause to the contrary a infant indeed after he come of age may  bring a original bill to set aside a decree for fraud and collusion between  the plaintiff and his guardian but there be no such suggestion in this bill  and we have deny they by our answer in the case of sir John Napier and lady  Effingham Howard Ant Cas it be adjudge that a infant when he come of age may  amend his answer but can not file a new bill or amend the old and Mr trefusis  may have any relief he be entitle to under the reservation to show cause and a  decree whether it be enrol or not may be plead to a original bill if it be not  enrol the party who think himself aggrieve by it may be relieve by a rehear if  it be enrol by a bill of review or sure this decree may be plead as a lie to  hang and these decree against infant never be enrol mosely report er p so if a  decree can not be plead till enrolment infant on their come of age may always  bring new bill mosely report Mr solicitor general for the plaintiff we do not  suggest or suppose there be any fraud or collusion in the former cause but we  say that our guardian do not make a proper defence for want of be acquaint  with several particular especial with a agreement of lady cotton with Mr  trefusis to waive the benefit of her marriage settlement the defendant say a  decree can be impeach by a new bill I agree that by the rule of the court a  absolute decree can whether it be enrol or not but this be a decree nisi and  till the day for show cause be pass it be in suspense whether it will be  absolute or not and till that time it be not a complete decree and if our  cause shall be allow the decree can never be make absolute and then this plea  will be allow on a supposition which prove not true and it be more Allowable  to set aside decree against infant by bill than any other decree nisi because  other defendant be tie down to show cause on the plead but a infant if his  defence be imperfect though there be no fraud or collusion in the case may  amend his answer when he come of age if a infant be plaintiff he can amend his  bill but may file a bill against his prochein any if he have be guilty of any  fraud or collusion but if he be defendant he be make a party against the will  and he may amend his answer and file a bill of discovery to that end against  the plaintiff in the former cause and great part of this bill be for a  discovery and the plaintiff further pray a distribution of their father  personal estate and the sister one of the plaintiff be not a party to the  other cause so this be not a bill to vary the former decree but to enable we  to show cause against it and for further relief and be in nature of a cross  bill in which case the plaintiff can plead the dependency of the original suit  and it be proper that Mr trefusis shall amend his former answer and that both  cause shall come on together Mr will the defendant have plead this decree as a  final judgement whereas a decree nisi can be plead but as lie to hang and only  in bar of the same bill but the defendant may bring a cross bill both for a  discovery and relief because he may have a more adequate remedy by set forth  his case as plaintiff than by way of defence sir John Napier be both plain  tiff and defendant but Mr trefusis bring no cross bill Lord chancellor it be  agree by both side that a absolute decree can be call in question by bill for  that will make cause endless mosely report and decree contradictory but it  must be final unless it be reverse on a rehear or by a bill of review or a  appeal a bill be file against the infant to have the benefit of a marriage  settlement and a decree be make for the plaintiff and the infant have a half  year give after he come of age to show cause against this decree but this be a  absolute decree the court give their judgement and nothing can hinder it be  absolute but the defendant show cause but he can come in and controvert this  decree by another bill and I think the case be strong against a infant because  he may amend his answer but he may controvert this decree two way if there be  any fraud or collusion between the plaintiff and his guardian by a original  bill or if matter that then appear be not insist on or if he have discover new  matter since he may amend his defence and have a bill of discovery which be  the reason I enlarge the time for his show cause till the defendant have put  in their answer and he may have the same remedy by amend his answer as he  propose by the bill so this plea must be allow with this express declaration  that the defendant may insist on all these thing in the other cause and I will  give he leave to put in a new answer Friday march the that motion