important points in the conduct of a cause, independently of the direction to the jury, which are all the subject of a bill of exceptions." (i)

The following instances of the subjectmatter of a bill of exceptions are to be found in the books:

Disallowing a challenge to the array (k). Refusing to inquire whether a return was made by the proper party (1).

Disallowing a plea in bar (m). Disallowing a plea in abatement (n). Disallowing a challenge to the polls (0). Refusing to allow matter pleaded in abatement, to be pleaded in bar (p).

(i) See also 1 Jenk. Cent. 64; 2 Jenk. Cent. 33; Bac. Abr." Bill of Exceptions;" Show. P. C. 120; Bull. N. P. 316.

(k) 9 Lib. Ass. pl. 8; Lord Paget and Bishop of Coventry's case, 1 Leon. 5.

(1) 11 Hen. 4, 52, 65, 92.

(m) 2 Edw. 4, 6 b.

(n) 2 Edw. 4, 53.

(0) 21 Edw. 4, 12 b; Sir John Barkley v. Phillips, Dy. 231 b.

(P) 5 Hen. 7, 40.

Refusing a view (q).

Improper reception of evidence at nisi

prius (r).

On trial at bar (s).

Improper rejection of evidence (t).

Ruling evidence to be sufficient (u).
Directing a nonsuit (x).

Disallowing a demurrer to evidence (y).
Misdirection (z).

(g) 10 Hen. 7, 8.

(r) 27 Hen. 8, 24, 25; Thurston v. Slatford, 1 Salk. 284; Searle v. Lord Barrington, 2 Stra. 827; Bishop of Meath v. Lord Belfield, 1 Wils. 215; Mostyn v. Fabrigas, Cowp. 161; Marston v. Fox, 8 A. & E. 14; Lord Trimlestown v. Kemmis, 9 Cl. & Fin. 749; cum multis aliis.

(s) Enfield v. Hall, 2 Lev. 237; Davies v. Lowndes, 4 Bing. N. C. 478.

(t) City of London v. Unfree Merchants, 2 Show. R. 146; Symmers v. Regem, Cowp. 489; Anon. 7 Mod. 53; Strode v. Palmer, Lill. Ent. 250; Lord Trimlestown v. Kemmis, ubi supra.

(u) Phillips v. Bateman, 16 East, 362; Thurston v. Slatford, 1 Lutw. 905; Brownl. Ent. 129.

(x) Strother v. Hutchinson, 4 Bing. N. C. 83. (y) Cort v. Bishop of St. David's, Cro. Car. 341. (x) Chichester v. Philips, Sir T. Raym. 404; Davenport v. Tyrrel, 1 W. Black, 675; Culley v. Doe, 11

Refusing to direct the jury to find a special verdict (a).

Refusing to receive a replication, or to allow it to be entered on the record (b).

In the Lessee of Lawlor v. Murray (c), Lord Redesdale expressed an opinion that the allowance by the Court of an amendment of one of its own records, could not be made the subject of a bill of exceptions.

4. Of the form of the Bill of Exceptions, the mode of tendering it, and the proceedings upon it.

The bill of exceptions should set forth so much of the proceedings as is necessary to show at what stage of the cause the exception was taken, and to render the precise nature of the exception, and the mode of its disallowance, perfectly clear and intelligible. If it is tacked to the record, it may commence by showing at what stage of the proceedings

A. & E. 1008; Rutter v. Chapman, & M. & W. 13; Lord Trimlestown v. Kemmis, 9 Cl. & Fin. 749. (a) Brownl. Ent. 135.

(b) Rous v. Wright, Brownl. Ent. 136.

(c) 1 Scho. & Lef. 75.

the exception was taken, and then set out the exception itself (d). If not tacked to the record, it must set out the whole of the proceedings from the commencement of the action down to the sealing of the bill by the judge (e).

It would seem that in strictness the bill of exceptions ought to be ingrossed on parchment and tendered to the judge during the course of the trial or other proceeding out of which the exception arises, and that it ought to be then sealed (f). "Though no time be appointed by this act when the justices shall put their seals, the party must pray the same before judgment; but if they deny it, then may they be commanded after judgment to put their seals, and then the putting of their seals after judgment shall be sufficient (g)." (d) See Bull. N. P. 319, 320.

(e) See Bull. N. P. 317, 318, 319; Lee's Dict. Bill of Exceptions, where see the forms. See forms, Brownl. Ent. 129, 131, 134, 136; 1 Lutw. 905; Lilly's Ent. 248, 249, &c.; Tidd's Forms, 326.

(f) See per Cur. in Gardner v. Baillie, 1 Bos. & Pul. 33; Lilly's Pr. Reg. 232; Shower's P. C. 115.

(g) 2 Inst. 427.

c 5

The usual practice is to reduce to writing the substance of the exception at the time it is taken, and it is then signed by the counsel on each side, and the bill of exceptions is afterwards drawn up in form and tendered to the judge to affix his seal (h). It must however be reduced into writing at the time it is taken and disallowed, or the benefit of the exception will be lost (i). If the exception is truly and correctly stated, the judge is bound to seal it (k). If untruly stated he may refuse to do so (1). It seems a writ of error should not be issued before the bill of exceptions is sealed, or it may be held a waiver of the exception (m).

The bill of exceptions when sealed is carried with the record into the court of error (n),

(h) See Lee's Dict. Bill of Exceptions; Williams v. Taylor, 6 Bing. 512.

(i) Wright v. Sharp, Salk. 288.

(k) 3 Black. Com. 372; 2 Inst. 427.

(1) Duchess of Grafton v. Holt, Skin. 354; Show. P. C. 129.

(m) Dillon v. Doe d. Parker, 1 Bing. 17; see however Williams v. Taylor, 6 Bing. 512.

(n) 1 Black. 675; 2 Stra. 826.