SALMON v. CLAGETT.—3 BLAND. 177

nent or scandalous; and if, upon reference to a master, it is re-
ported not to be so, the injunction is dissolved; but if otherwise,
the impertinence may be expunged, and the plaintiff may then
shew exceptions for cause; or he may shew cause upon the merits.
Eden Inj. 71, 73. If he shews cause upon the exceptions, and can-
not maintain them, there is no cause shewn, and the injunction is
gone; Bullion v. Birch, 2 Ves. & Ben. 42; Lacy v. Hornby: 2 Ves.
& Bea. 292; and, on shewing cause upon the merits, if the answer
denies all the circumstances upon which the equity is founded, the
universal practice is to give credit to the answer, and the injunc-
tion is dissohed upon the credit given to the answer for that pur-
pose. Eden Inj. 80. If a plea is ordered to stand lor an an-
swer, with liberty to except, the defendant may move to dissolve,
in like manner as on the coming in of an answer. Eden Inj. 70. But,
if his demurrer or plea is allowed, he may move to dissolve abso-
lutely in the first instance; Mason v. Murray, 2 Dick. 536; Hurst
v. Thomas, 2 Anst. 585; or the better opinion seems to be, that
upon the allowance of the demurrer or plea, the injunction is gone
at once without any motion to dissolve. Tracers v. *Stafford, 2
Ves. 20. From which it appears, that, according to the English
course of proceeding, on a motion to dissolve, a demurrer or plea
allowed, and an unexceptionable answer, denying the equity of the
bill, stand upon the same footing; and that the whole answer, as
well that which is responsive to the bill, as that in which new mat-
ter is advanced in avoidance, is taken for true, credit is then given
to it for every fact it asserts, and it is taken to be in all respects
correct and sufficient.

Hence the intimate connection, according to the English prac-
tice, between exceptions to the answer, and a motion to dissolve;
the fate of the one almost always involving that of the other. And
hence, too, the propriety of the expressions, so often found in the
English books, that if the answer contains a sufficient defence to
the case stated in the bill, the injunction will be dissolved; Eden
Inj. 86; and of shewing cause on the merits, or equity of the case
confessed in the answer; Eden Inj. 78; and that the defendant has
answered and * denied the whole equity of the bill. Forum
Rom. 196; 2 Harri. Prac. Cha. 263. These phrases are 161
sufficiently explicit in reference to the English practice, according
to which, as to points of fact, an answer like a plea has then credit
throughout for all it avers; and no distinction is then made be-
tween matters responsive and in avoidance. But in reference to a
practice which recognizes the distinctions that have just been
drawn between the case stated in the bill upon which the injunc-
tion rests; the case made by the bill as a ground for the relief
prayed; and the case presented by the answer including both
matter responsive and in avoidance, they are exceedingly ambig-
uous.

12 3B.