BURCH v. SCOTT. 125

August last; and the other, as a mere stay of execution, because
of some credits not having been given. It was also urged, that
the allowing of such a bill of review to be filed, did, of itself,
operate a suspension of all further proceedings, until the final hear-
ing; and that it must be so understood, when taken in connexion
with the prayer of the bill, and the circumstances of a bond having
been required and accepted. The Chancellor has been misunder-
stood.

According to the English law, neither the filing of a petition for
re-hearing; nor a bill in the nature of a bill of review; nor a bill
of review for error apparent on the face of the decree; nor a bill
of review for new matter, after leave given ;(m) nor an original
bill, to set aside a decree on the ground of fraud; nor a bill to
open an enrolled decree, and let in the merits, has ever, or under
any circumstances been considered, in itself, as a suspension of
the execution of a decree. The party having the decree, in all such
cases, is allowed to proceed, unless specially and expressly restrain-
ed; which is never done but on the sum decreed being brought into
court, or on good security being given. Similar law and practice
has been long established here; and, hence it was, that the Chan-
cellor required a bond with approved surety, to be filed before he
imposed the restriction or injunction, expressed in the order of the
16th of November last.(n)

If, on considering this bill in its third character, there should be
found sufficient cause for opening the decree, and having the case
re-heard upon its merits, it will be most advantageous to all parties,
that it should be done now: And it will be unnecessary to inquire,
and express an opinion, whether the three characters of this bill

(m) Mitf, PL 88.
(n) Mitf. PL 89.

CARROLL v. PARRAN.—February, 1733.—Bill of review—subpoena issued.—Upon
motion of the defendant's counsel, that the bill be dismissed—ordered, that the said
bill be dismissed with costs; leave not being given either by petition or motion to
file such bill of review- _____

Daniel Dulany, on behalf of Charles Carroll, moves the court, that he may have
leave to file a bill of review against Parran, and that a bond with good security, pay-
able to John Parran, may be lodged in court by the said Carroll to stay execution of
the same decree.—Ordered, that a bill of review be filed, and that no execution issue
upon the former decree. ____

Upon motion of Samuel Young, of counsel with the defendant,—Ordered, that he
have leave given to answer until next court.—Chancery Records, Lib. I. R. No.2,
pages 543, 643.