4

SECT. III.

COMMON FORMS USED IN FRAMING ANSWERS.

1. Where a defendant admits a statement.

And this defendant further answering saith he hath been informed and believes it to be true that &c. Or, this defendant admits that &c.

2. Where a defendant admits the statement of a written instrument.

And this defendant further saith he hath been informed and believes it to be true that &c. but this defendant for greater certainty therein craves leave to refer to the said when the same shall be produced.

3. Where a defendant believes a statement may be true, but qualifies his admission of it not knowing the same of his own knowledge.

And this defendant further answering saith he believes it to be true that at the time of the said testator's making his said will and at the time of his death the said testator's sister Jane the wife of in the said bill named had such children as therein in that behalf named, but this defendant does not know the same of his own knowledge, nor can this defendant state as to his belief or otherwise whether she had or not any other children or child at such times or either of them.

Or thus:

And this defendant further saith he has never heard or been informed save by the said complainant's said bill whether &c. but this defendant believes that &c. as in the said bill is alleged.

4. Where a defendant sets forth a deed, and alleges the payment by him of a sum of money.

And this defendant saith that by a certain deed-poll or instrument in writing under the hands and seals of &c. and bearing date &c. the said did in consideration of the sum of £ to them paid by this defendant, the receipt &c., and which said sum was in fact so paid, remise, release, &c. As by such deed or instrument, to which

this defendant craves leave to refer when the same shall be produced,

will appear.

5. Where a defendant is entirely ignorant with regard to the statement in the bill.

And this defendant further answering saith he knows not, and has not been informed save by the said complainant's said bill, and cannot set forth as to his belief or otherwise whether the said complainant has or not applied for or procured letters of administration of the goods chattels rights and credits of the said A. B. to be granted to her by and out of the proper or any or what Ecclesiastical Court, nor whether &c.

Or thus:

And this defendant further answering saith it may be true for any thing this defendant knows to the contrary that &c. but this defendant is an utter stranger to all and every such matters, and cannot form any belief concerning the same (ƒ).

6. Where one of two defendants of his own knowledge knows the statement in the bill to be true, and the other defendant does not know the same but believes the answer of his co-defendant.

And this defendant M. M. further severally answering saith, and. this defendant E. R. believes it to be true, that the said testator was not &c.

7. Where two defendants admit the happening of

an event but cannot state when it happened.

And these defendants severally admit &c. but when in particular these defendants or either of them to the knowledge or belief of the other of them do not know, and cannot set forth as to their information and belief or otherwise.

8. Where several defendants join, and are all ignorant of the allegations in the bill,

And these defendants further severally say that they or any or either of them to the knowledge or belief of the others or other of them do not know, and have never been informed save by the said complainant's bill, and cannot set forth as to their belief or otherwise whether &c.

(ƒ) See Amhurst v. King, 2 Sim. & Stu. 183.

9. Where one of two defendants denies the allegation in the bill, and the other defendant believes such denial to be true.

And this defendant M. M. further severally answering saith she denies, and this defendant E. R. believes such denial to be true (g), that the said J.S. M. was then incapable of understanding the said codicil, but saith that he fully knew &c.

10. Where two defendants join in denying the allegations in the bill.

And these defendants further severally say that they these defendants did not nor did either of them to the knowledge or belief of the other of them, nor did the said J. and H. or several or any or either of the members of the said firm to the knowledge or belief of these defendants, a short time or at any time before &c.

11. Where a schedule of deeds is required to be set forth.

And this defendant further saith he hath in the schedule to this his answer annexed or under-written, and which he prays may be taken as part thereof, set forth according to the best and utmost of his knowledge remembrance information and belief, a full true and particular list or schedule of all deeds &c., and this defendant is ready and willing to produce and leave the same in the hands of his clerk in court for the usual purposes.

12. Where an account of rents, or monies received, or paid, is required to be set forth by several defendants.

And these defendants further severally answering say, they have in the [first] schedule to this their answer annexed or under-written, and which they pray may be taken as part thereof, set forth according to the best and utmost of their several and respective knowledge remembrance information and belief, a full true and particular account of all and every sum and sums of money &c. [Or, if an account required as to real estates, thus: a full true and just rental and particular of all and singular the real estates &c.]

(g) See Walker v. Norton, Hardr. 165.

And this defendant denies all and all manner of unlawful combi- Denial of unlawful combination and confederacy (h) wherewith he is by the said bill charged, nation; without this, that there is any other matter cause or thing in the said General traverse. complainant's said bill of complaint contained (i) material or necessary for this defendant to make answer unto and not herein and hereby well and sufficiently answered confessed traversed and avoided or denied, is true to the knowledge or belief of this defendant; all which matters and things this defendant is ready and willing to aver maintain and prove as this honorable court shall direct, and humbly prays to be hence dismissed with his reasonable costs and charges in this behalf most wrongfully sustained.

(h) An answer to a charge of unlawful combination cannot be compelled, and a charge of lawful combination ought to be specific to render it material, as it has been determined that a general charge of combination need not be answered, see Oliver v. Haywood, 1 Anstr. 82; Ld. Red. Tr. Pl. p. 41, 4th edit.

(i) It is the universal practice to add by way of conclusion a general traverse or denial of all the matters in the bill, Ld. Rd. Tr. Pl. p. 314; this is said to have obtained when the practice was for the defendant merely to set forth his case, without answering every clause in the bill, see Anon. Ca. 2 P. Wms. 86, where a motion was made to suppress an answer as irregular or improper, the general traverse at the end being omitted, and on the ground that without this traverse there was no issue joined, but the motion was refused.

In the case of an infant, the denial of combination and the traverse at the conclusion are omitted, as he is considered incapable of the combination charged in the bill, and his answer cannot be excepted to for insufficiency; Ld. Red. Tr. Pl. p. 314.

A defendant is not bound to confine himself to an answer to the interrogatories in the bill, but may state circumstances in his defence; if the answer goes on to state matter not material to the defendant's case, it will be deemed impertinent (1), but if it relates to the subject the court will not look critically into its materiality, for though not material according to the statements in the bill, it may become so by evidence; the party must shew to make it impertinent, that it never can have any relation to the subject of the suit (2).

If a general question be asked, and a particular one also which is included in the general one, the defendant must answer the particular as well as the general question (3). Specific charges in the bill must be answered particularly and precisely, therefore a general answer though it may include an answer to a particular inquiry is insufficient (4). An answer also must not be argumentative, but there must be positive averment (5). If the discovery sought be not material, the defendant may object to it by answer, and the practice of the Masters is to disallow exceptions where the questions are quite immaterial (6).

In an answer to a bill for an account, it is not sufficient for the defendant to refuse to give information further than to enable the plaintiff to go into the Master's office, the plaintiff has a right to have by the answer connecting itself with books and accounts referred to as part of the answer, the fullest information defendant can give him (7). If a bill requires an admission of assets, or that the defendant may set out an account, if the defendant admits assets

(1) Ld. Red. Tr. Pl. p. 313, 4th edit.; 2 Madd. Ch. Pr. 353, 5. (2) Ramsden v. Cass, cited 2 Madd. Ch. Pr. 276.

(3) Prout v. Underwood, 2 Cox, 135.

(4) Wharton v. Wharton, 1 Sim. & Stu. 235, 6; Hepburn v. Durand,

1 Bro. Ch. Ca. 502.

(5) Faulder v. Stuart, 11 Ves. 303.

(6) Agar v. Regent's Canal Company, Coop. R. 215; and see the cases referred to in note (7), Ld. Red. Îr. Pl. p. 316, 4th ed.

(7) White y. Williams, 8 Ves. 193, 4.