48 THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



afterward for the plaintiff to prove his demand — or the defendant 

 admits his signature to a note, but says he was an infant at the time 

 of signing it — then a day is fixed for him to "prove his allegations." 

 The plea may be clearly bad in law — as when James Heward, of De- 

 troit, Labourer, sues Thomas Heward, of the same place. Gentleman, 

 for wages, and Thomas appears and saying that the debt is justly 

 due and owing, pleads that he hired James, acting as agent for the 

 Miami Company at Sandusky. There being no pretence that James 

 knew anything of this, judgment was entered against Thomas for 

 £14-1-3 ''reserving to the defendant his recourse for repayment 

 from his Employers." 



And, 19th May, 1791, "George McDougall vs. Jacques Campeau," 

 Roe filed the declaration, the defendant appeared in person and for 

 "a plea says that he expected the plaintiff would wait for payment, 

 as he had not wherewithal to satisfy him — especially as his land was 

 mortgaged for the money." These are, no doubt, perfectly satisfactory 

 reasons for not paying, especially the first — but the law is inexorable, 

 and as the "defendant acknowledged the obligation," "judgment was 

 directed to be entered against him for £165-16-8, Hfx., and interest 

 wdth costs." These are taxed at £9-6-6, Hfx. "Hfx.", of course, 

 means Halifax or Quebec currency. 



The defendant may appear in person and deny all liability. He 

 may be allowed to plead before a certain time or a day may be set 

 for the plaintiff to prove his demand. Very rarely, indeed, the de- 

 fendant's Attorney Walter Roe, or Charles Smyth, by procuration, 

 enters an appearance; sometimes, too, the defendant himself "enters 

 appearance." 



If the defendant upon being called three times, do not appear 

 in person or by Attorney, "it is ordered that a default be entered 

 against him." That does not mean that judgment is entered for the 

 plaintiff, however — the defendant has another chance — he may ap- 

 pear at the next Court and plead — or fail again to appear, in which 

 case a second default is entered against him, and a day fixed for the 

 plaintiff to proceed to proof. Let me give an instance. In the case 

 of "Richard Dobie, of Montreal, Merch't., v. John Martin, of Detroit, 

 Merch't., on July 16th, 1789 "the plaintiff by Mr. Roe his Attorney, 

 filed his Declaration, and the Defendant being called thrice and not 

 appearing. It is therefore ordered that default be entered against him." 

 At the Sittings of July 23rd 1789 "Mr. Roe the Attorney for plaintiff, 

 informed the Court that this action was continued last Court day 

 and that the defendant had been then thrice called and not ai-)pear- 

 ing, and a Default was recorded against him. The Defendant now 

 being called again and entered appearance and declares he is not in- 



