case Hawkins versus croak at the chancellor house Lord chancellor S c p wms Mr  Verney for the defendant this cause come before your lordship on a appeal Ant  Cas from a decree of his honour the master of the roll and on exception take  to the master report of the regularity of issue the sequestration but as if  the decree be reverse that will put a end to the other question I shall accord  to your lordship command confine myself to that on the that of February a  sequestration issue for want of a answer and on the that of the same month the  plaintiff obtain a order to set down the cause on the sequestration that the  bill may be take pro acknowledged admitted fact when the cause come on to be  hear it be allege for the defendant that he be Willing to answer the cause be  adjourn to the that of march on the that of march we put in a answer which the  plaintiff except to and on the that of may the master report insufficient and  the next day we be serve with a subpoena for cost and to make a better answer  on the that of may we pay the cost and on the that of July we put in a second  answer which on the that of July the master report insufficient then we put in  a three answer which be swear and file the that of July and on the saint of  July the cause come to a hear and the bill be decree to be take pro  acknowledged admitted fact though we produce a certificate that our three  answer be file and which not be except to must be take for a full and  sufficient answer though only two answer be take notice of in the decree but  as the cause be open on the appeal we may read to your lordship the  certificate and if the decree be enrol we can have a bill of review for mosely  report error appear on the face of it that we have put in two answer whereas  the foundation of these decree be that the defendant will not answer though  the present practice be otherwise yet ancient if the defendant will not answer  and a sequestration be return the bill be not take pro acknowledged admitted  fact unless the plaintiff can prove the allegation of it because in all bill  they be great beyond the truth in order to come at it vern for since the  defendant by refuse to answer deprive the plaintiff of put matter in issue the  court give he a liberty to prove they in vern the Lord keeper take time to  consider whether he will decree the bill pro acknowledged admitted fact so it  be not a very plain case and vern if one of the defendant be in contempt and  stand out to a sequestration and the cause be hear against the other yet he  may come in and answer and the cause may be hear again as to he and if a  defendant put in four insufficient answer by the course of the court he be to  be examine on interrogatory in chain and Chan Cas where a defendant put in a  plea which be overrule and after three insufficient answer the chancellor will  not commit he to be examine on interrogatory but in this case the defendant be  in prison at the suit of the king on a conviction of forgery in which case the  bill ought never to be take pro acknowledged admitted fact till he have be  bring into court by habeas corpus and tell of the danger he be in if he do not  answer and have a day give he to put in his answer that the court may judge  whether he be obstinate or unable through poverty or otherwise to answer and  this be the practice whether he be in custody at the suit of the plaintiff or  of a stranger cursus cane of which the plaintiff be so sensible that since the  decree he have constant bring he into court to enforce the execution of it  though it be more necessary before the decree than since that the bill may be  read to he and he know what to answer if the merit be with they to reverse the  decree will not rob they of the benefit but if they be with we we be preclude  from the advantage of they by this matter of form Mr attorneygeneral for the  plaintiff this decree will appear to be very regular from the circumstance of  the case and the general practice of the court when the cause come first to be  hear on the sequestration the plaintiff be undoubted entitle of right to a  decree that his bill shall be take pro acknowledged admitted fact no answer be  then on the file but then the defendant apply for liberty to answer and the  master of the roll give he leave and adjourn the cause he put in a answer  which the master report insufficient in fifty two exception and the plaintiff  obtain a order to bring the cause on again upon the sequestration when it be  allege that the mosely report er p defendant have mosely report put in a  further answer which be afterward report insufficient the cause come on again  as it do original for the liberty to answer be only a indulgence give by the  court out of the rule which the defendant have no right to and have abuse and  the defendant in his petition after the second answer for the cause to stand  over confess that he can not put in a full answer be a prisoner without a  sight of the letter in the custody of the plaintiff clerk in court and since  he have not see they this be a admission that his three answer be insufficient  then the question be whether the cause be set down on the sequestration the  bill may not be decree pro acknowledged admitted fact though the defendant  have put in three insufficient answer whatever be the ancient practice the  present course of the court be when the defendant be in contempt to a  sequestration for want of a answer to take the bill pro acknowledged admitted  fact and court of equity have establish this rule in conformity to the court  of law where if the defendant appear and will not plead by the judgement on  nil to say the whole declaration be take for true so if no answer be in the  decree must be admit to be regular and these insufficient answer will not vary  the case but they be to be consider as no answer for the very reason on which  these decree be find cur cane that by the defendant fault no issue can be join  for the plaintiff to prove his case for if the answer be insufficient the  merit of the case be not put in issue beside the plaintiff want the discovery  of the defendant to assist he in his evidence and that in case of contempt a  insufficient answer be consider as no answer appear from hence that if the  process of contempt be once begin and a insufficient answer be put in the  plaintiff be not to begin the process de to make new but may carry on the old  process so this bill ought to be take pro acknowledged admitted fact because  the defendant have do nothing to put the matter in issue and the plaintiff  want his discovery and can otherwise come at a decree but this be say to be  against the course of the court by which if the defendant put in four  insufficient answer he be to be examine upon interrogatory in chain but in  that case there never be any foundation to set down the cause on the  sequestration the process have not be carry on to a sequestration before any  answer come in and as the plaintiff if he have carry on the process in part  may have continue it to a sequestration for want of a sufficient answer so as  he have go the length he may revive the sequestration for the insufficiency of  the answer but they say he be a prisoner and therefore ought to have be bring  up by habeas corpus he be not in custody when he put in his first answer and  be not now at our suit so we be not oblige to take that method which be only  observe when the defendant lie in prison on a process of contempt in that  cause and though his answer be file it be no answer and we mosely report be  not oblige to receive it because the cost of the contempt be not pay for if a  injunction be grant on a attachment till answer and further order though the  defendant file a answer he can move to dissolve the injunction on come in of  the answer till he have clear his contempt so the strict rule of the court be  with we the plaintiff be entitle to this decree before any answer come in and  the court let the defendant put in a answer not as his right but as a  extraordinary indulgence to see whether he will make a proper use of it and  when they see he abuse it only allow the plaintiff to resort back to what he  be at first entitle and put he in the same state he be in before Lord  chancellor by the old practice of the court the plaintiff be undoubted put to  prove his bill by witness viva voice and so be every plaintiff at law his  declaration as appear by those word et ind to lead forth sectan where to cut  signify the witness Mr solicitor general if the reason of this case be the  same with those in which the bill have be decree to be take pro acknowledged  admitted fact the judgement ought to be the same and if a insufficient answer  be a objection few bill can be take pro acknowledged admitted fact when the  cause come first on to be hear there be no answer so the plaintiff be entitle  to this decree and it be the mere indulgence of the court to allow the  defendant time to put in a answer and the cause in the mean time be adjourn  over in the same plight it stand before the defendant put in his answer which  be report insufficient and the cause come on again and the defendant allege he  have put in a further answer upon which a order be make that if he do not  procure a report within four day that it be a sufficient answer the cause  shall stand first in the paper to be hear for the court be suspicious of the  defendant insist upon his procure a report the master report the answer  insufficient and then a order mosely report er p be make that the cause shall  stand for the saint of July and he say he put in a three answer on the that  but it be not the fill it with the clerk make it a answer for the plaintiff be  not bind to receive it because the cost be not pay and the answer be only  throw in that the cause may stand over again and therefore this answer ought  to be lie out of the case and the two former be insufficient be no answer  which appear from the method of carry on the process Chan Cas and the subpoena  to make a better answer be serve on the clerk and not on the defendant as the  first subpoena and if the plaintiff be come mosely report to the end of the  line he can go no further but may indeed begin de to make new and there be  this further reason why a bill shall be take pro acknowledged admitted fact  upon a insufficient answer because nothing material perhaps may be answer by  it but only combination and confederacy what then can the plaintiff do must he  set down the cause on bill and answer that will be a admission that the answer  be good though the court have give their opinion that it be not sufficient or  must he reply to it but then he lose the benefit of a discovery from the  defendant which be often the chief end of come into this court because he can  prove his case and be the reason why the old practice of prove the bill be lie  aside but they say if the defendant put in four insufficient answer he may be  examine in chain but suppose he will not be examine and the process run to a  sequestration because the party can be find but a examination in chain suppose  he find and take but still it must come to this at last that the plaintiff  must either set down the cause on bill and answer or reply to the answer or  have a decree that the bill be take pro acknowledged admitted fact but it be  object that it will appear by the enrolment of the decree that two answer be  put in but it will not appear and there be no authority to open those answer  but the decree be make on read only the bill if there be six defendant and  some of they appear to hear judgement and some do not only the answer of those  that appear be open and enrol and yet the answer of the other be parcel of the  proceed Mr will this decree may be consider as if no answer be in for the  cause must stand in July as it do in February because the defendant do not  comply with what the court indulge he in and which he be not entitle to by the  rule of practice and the court consider a insufficient answer as no answer by  way of penalty on the party who will not submit to the judgement of the court  that it be insufficient which appear from hence that at the hear it can be  open and if a injunction be grant till answer and further order though the  defendant answer and deny all the equity on which the plaintiff pray his  injunction yet if he have not answer the other point of the bill full the  injunction shall stand but they say a three answer come in on the that of July  which be not except to there be no occasion to have the judgement of the court  on it because the defendant himself have confess it insufficient for he say he  can not put in a sufficient answer till he see the letter which he have not  yet so on fill exception it be sufficient if the defendant submit to answer  and this be the answer his honour the master of the roll give that there be no  occasion to refer a answer which mosely report the party himself have allow  insufficient but this be no answer because he do not offer to pay we the cost  Mr mead the refer the answer be no acceptance of they or a waiver of the cost  the plaintiff can not proceed till it be know whether the defendant have put  in a good answer or not so he must refer it to a master who report it  insufficient the plaintiff be only get on his cause again by the proper method  and accord after the report he apply to have his cause set down again if a  answer be report insufficient and the process be carry on to a sequestration  can the plaintiff set down his cause on the sequestration otherwise he be  without remedy or if the defendant be in custody and will not answer personal  interrogatory may not the plaintiff carry on the process to a sequestration  and have a decree upon it Lord chancellor a decree pro acknowledged admitted  fact be like a judgement by nothing to say at commonlaw on deliver a  declaration the defendant have time to appear and plead and if he appear and  the rule be out the plaintiff may sign judgement but if the rule be out and  the defendant plead before judgement be sign no judgement on nothing to say  can be give but only on the plea when this cause first come to be hear the  plaintiff be certain entitle to this decree which bind the defendant as to the  truth and cut he out of any defence more Cas cro Elizabeth roll ab part Jon  and be his case what it will he can have no remedy by appeal mosely report er  p so it be reasonable and one will wish such a man if possible let in to make  his defence at the hear the defendant desire the liberty to answer and the  cause be adjourn for that purpose he put in a answer and the plaintiff allow  his capacity by take exception to it this decree be that the bill shall be  take for true because the defendant will not answer which be false because  there appear to be a answer in which the defendant have deny several part of  the bill and can I presume there be no answer when it appear there be and that  the defendant have confess the bill rob Glanville and allen case when he have  deny it the same objection may be make in all other case to the method of  process and yet they have not be hitherto find unsuccessful the defendant  ought first to have pay the cost but since the plaintiff have accept the  answer he can say there be none so I think these be contradiction but since  the defendant submit to answer he shall not now say the sequestration issue  irregular and he have a benefit by it so the exception must be discharge and  the court be of opinion that mosely report the matter of the plaintiff bill  can be decree pro acknowledged admitted fact for want of a answer because it  appear by the record of this court that the defendant have put in a answer to  the plaintiff bill which be accept by the plaintiff as a answer by except to  it and serve the defendant with a subpoena to make a further answer and though  in several point it be report insufficient yet the defendant have deny several  material part of the plaintiff bill it can be say in this case that he have  put in no answer or be presume that the plaintiff bill be in those point true  or confess and if the decree shall be allow it will rob the party of the  benefit of his defence cur cane Chan Cas prax cane pract Reg in cane introd to  clerk tut in cane Tuesday July the that motion