TOWNSHEND v. DUNCAN.—2 BLAND. 77

With regard to the taking of testimony under the authority of a
special order of the Court, before a justice of the peace, I have not

them, and refused to give any such certificate. Yet, notwithstanding the
proof of these and many other strong circumstances on that trial, the jury,
by the great interest of the complainant, his attorney and others, brought in
a verdict in favor of the complainant, contrary to the proof of the illegiti-
macy of the plaintiff; and judgment was entered up thereon. These de-
fendants further admit, that their testators, and their wives had possession
of the mansion-house and a part of the land, after the death of the plain-
tiff's father; that Dryden Forbes held another part of the land; and that
Thomas T. Greenfield and his representatives, after his death, held another
part of the land; but they do not know what, or whether any rents and
profits were received by them, or any of them; nor do they know of any
timber being sold from the land.

The plaintiff filed exceptions to the answer of each defendant for nearly
the same causes. The exceptions to the answer of the defendant Gordon,
were as follows: the complainant excepts to the answer of the defendant
Gordon; first, for that the defendant, instead of answering the allegations
contained in the complainant's bill, launches out into scandalous and per-
sonal reflections on this complainant, which are not examinable, or deter-
minable in this honorable Court; especially as this complainant's right hath
been tried and determined according to the laws of the land; secondly, for
that the answer of the defendant needlessly and uselessly asperses the
memory and character of a gentleman who was Attorney-General: and has
been many years dead; which aspersions cannot possibly be examined into;
nor can they possibly affect the merits of the cause, or answer any other
justifiable purpose whatsoever; thirdly, for that the defendant only answers
generally, that the several persons mentioned in the said answer, or some,
or either of them, received the rents and profits of the said lands; but does
not answer or set forth who received such issues or profits; how much they
were, how much each tract was, or might have been rented, let, or leased
for by the year, either positively or to the best of his knowledge, remem-
brance, or belief; all which ought to have been done: the same being re-
quired by the complainant's bill; and fourthly, for that it is alleged in the
complainant's bill, that the several persons and defendants therein men-
tioned, made great profit and advantage by, and received great sums of
money and tobacco from the sale of timber from the said land and other-
wise; to which the defendant hath not given any answer, although required
so to do by the complainant's bill. The complainant, therefore, prays that
the said defendant may amend his answer as to the same, and give in a full
and sufficient answer to the complainant's bill of complaint.

At May Term, 1745, the counsel for the defendants admitted the answers
to be insufficient and imperfect in the several particulars excepted to: and
therefore consented that the exceptions aforesaid be adjudged good and
sufficient; and the answers insufficient in the particulars in the exceptions
mentioned; and that the matters excepted to for scandal and impertinence
be expunged; and the answers stand as to the other particulars; and the
defendants pay the usual costs, and the scandal and impertinences contained
in the said answers were accordingly expunged.

Upon motion of the counsel of the complainant, alleging that the scope of
the complainant's bill was to have an account, and to obtain satisfaction for
the rents and profits of his lands while they were unjustly withheld from
him, together with the interest thereof; it appearing by the bill and answers,