[riddell] practice OF COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 49 



debted in the sum as set forth in the plaintiff's declaration. The 

 Court ordered the plaintiff to prove his demand on the 20th of August 

 next." On August 20th "This action was continued the 23rd of July 

 last for the plaintiff to prove his Demand this day — in consequence 

 Walter Roe, Attorney for the plaintiff filed his Replication the 18th 

 inst. in the office. The Defendant being now thrice called and not 

 appearing thereupon, the plaintiff's Attorney moved for judgment, 

 the Court ordered the action to continue for eight days en Délibère, 

 and a second default entered against Defendant." "Eight days" 

 in those days meant a week. On August 27th " Walter Roe, Attorney 

 for the Plaintiff — the defendant being thrice called and not appearing." 

 Then appears what we should call reasons for judgment or the opinion 

 of the Court, thus, 



[ This is an action the Gist 

 "District of Hesse <{ of which is a record of 

 [ judgment in another Court: 

 to this the Defendant has pleaded that he owes nothing, but as he has 

 set up no payment or release of judgment, I must presume the mean- 

 ing of his plea to be the proper issue and a Traverse of the Record 

 of judgment. It seems so to be understood by the Replication of the 

 Plaintiff, who again relies upon and proffers the Record. The Evi- 

 dence filed is equally insufficient to support the action upon the Rules 

 of Evidence either of the ancient or present Laws of the Province, 

 the office copy of the Record being neither upon Parchment or under 

 seal. Wherefore the Court considers that judgment be entered as in 

 case of a nunsuit." 



I do not stay to point out the accuracy o ' otherwise of the Judge's 

 law; but hasten to another case which is thus intituled: — "John 

 Robert McDougall, of Detroit, Gentleman, vs. Isaac Germain." On 

 July 16th, the inevitable Walter Roe filed his declaration and the de- 

 fendant had a default entel-ed against him: on July 23, the defend- 

 ant again did not appear, a second default was entered against him 

 and the defendant directed to proceed to prove his demand on the 

 20th August — on August 20th the defendant did not appear and the 

 plaintiff " by his Attorney Walter Roe " called evidence. It was proved 

 that the defendant put certain cattle for agistment upon the plaintiff's 

 land on Hog Island, agreeing to pay well for them, also that 20 shil- 

 lings a head was the usual price on the Island — "This action is con- 

 tinued and remains en Délibère for eight days." On the 27th judg- 

 ment is entered up for £30 - 9 - 6 

 and £9 - 9 - 5 costs, in all £39-18-11 

 and a Writ of fi. fa. issued 5-0 



£40 - 3 - 11 



