BURCH v. SCOTT. 119

fied in refusing to allow such credit. And they state, that a credit
for $392 90, the amount of those two sums, and interest upon
them, was endorsed on the fieri facias, issued on the said decree,
and the balance only was required to be made by the said execu-
tion, which balance they aver they are justly entitled to, and that
no other deduction or discount ought to be allowed against the
amount of the claim, as stated in the said decree." And they fur-
ther deny all fraud, &c., as alleged in the bill, &e.

These defendants, Thomas Burch and others, by their petition
allege, that the plaintiffs, William Scott and others, had issued no
subpoenas, nor applied for any order of publication against these
defendants, who are nonresidents, as prayed by their bill; that
they, on learning that such a bill had been filed, have answered
thereto; and now pray, that the order of the 16th November,
1825, may be revoked.

4th May, 1826.—BLAND, Chancellor.—On the foregoing appli-
cation it is ordered, that the order of the 16th of November last
be dissolved and revoked, unless cause to the contrary be shewn
on the fourth day of the next term. Provided a copy of this
order, together with a copy of the foregoing petition, be served
on the complainants or their solicitor, on or before the first day
of June next.

A copy of this order having been served as required, the case
was afterwards brought before the court for its determination.

25th July, 1826.—BLAND, Chancellor.—This case standing
ready for hearing, on the notice given in pursuance of the order of
the 4th of May last, and the solicitors of the parties having been
fully heard, the proceedings were read and considered.

The Chancellor feels every disposition to relieve this case from
all embarrassing forms, and to reach its merits, if practicable. It
will, therefore, be necessary to disengage the complainants* sub-
stantial equity and object from the forms with which they have been
clothed; and to examine their bill with a due regard to their equity and
object, The substance of their complaint is, that a decree has been
obtained against one, which materially affects all of them, erroneously;
by fraud; by surprise; for much more than is due; or, to say the
least, improperly and to the exclusion of a good and available de-
fence. And upon the truth of these allegations, they ground their
equity to have the decree of the 4th of August last set aside, their
undenied credits alowed, their defence let in, and the matters in