328 GIBSON v. TILTON.—1 BLAND.

improperly and unnecessarily made parties, I shall dismiss the bill
altogether as to them.

Whereupon it is decreed, that the judgment of condemnation, in
the proceedings mentioned, obtained by Christian L. Manhardt
against the complainant Samuel Chase, as garnishee of James
Bryden, is hereby permitted to remain in full force and effect in all
respects whatever to the amount of $7,706; and, as to that amount
the injunction heretofore granted is hereby dissolved;—That as to
the sum of $1,620.02, the residue of the judgment, the injunction
is hereby made perpetual;—That the register make out and file in
this case correct copies of all the original deeds referred to in the
answer of the defendant David Hoffman; and deliver the original
deeds unto the complainant at any time he may demand the same,
as the deeds specified and required to be delivered to him by his
said contract, in the proceedings mentioned, bearing date on the
26th of March, 1812:—And that the complainant's bill of com-
plaint as to the defendants John Purviance and David Hoffman. is
hereby dismissed with costs;—And that the other defendants pay
unto the complainant his full costs as against them to be taxed by
the register.

352 * GISBON v. TILTON.

MOTION TO DISSOLVE INJUNCTION.—AFFIDAVITS MADE WITHOUT THE STATE.

On a motion to dissolve an injunction, objections of every kind to the answer
may be made, and are then in order; and it is a general rule, that if the
facts on which the equity of the injunction rests are denied, the injunc-
tion must be dissolved; otherwise it must be continued to the final hear-
ing, (a)

An affidavit made in another State to an answer to a bill in this Court, being
an authentication called for by a tribunal here, is a part of the judicial
proceedings of this State; and is not such a judicial proceeding of
another State, as comes within the provision of the Constitution of the
United States, and the Acts of Congress respecting the manner in which
such proceedings shall be proved.

The sending of commissioners to other States to have testimony there taken;
and, the having of answers in Chancery, and the like, authenticated
there, by affidavit or otherwise, has long been considered as one of the
most common instances of the interchange of courtesies among the
nations of Europe; and is a kind of comity which should be liberally
extended among the States of this Union.

Although a person, who so testifies, or makes an affidavit abroad, cannot be
proceeded against criminally here; yet a party here, who should know-
ingly use such spurious evidence, might be punished here for practising
an imposition upon the Court.

(a) Distinguished in Belt v. Blackburn, 26 Md. 241. See Salmon v. Clagett,
3 Bland, 125.