JONES v. MAGILL. 201

Whereupon it is ordered, that the injunction heretofore granted
in this case be and the same is hereby continued until the coming

Whereupon, the plaintiff prayed for an injunction to stay the proceedings at law,
&c., which was granted as prayed.

The defendants put in their answer, in which they admit, that they had obtained a
judgment as stated; and as to the agreement, they aver that they have no knowledge
of it; but they say, that they verily believe, that there never was any such instru-
ment 6f writing made by their testator. In regard to the payments alleged to have
been made by the plaintiff, the answer is entirely silent.

Upon these circumstances the case was submitted on the notes of the solicitors of
the parties.

1th January, 1800.—HANSON, Chancellor.—This cause is before the Chancellor
on a motion to dissolve made on filing the answer. The bill, answers, exhibits,
arguments of counsel in writing, and all other proceedings, have been by him read
and considered.

By the written argument of the defendants' counsel, the Chancellor is informed,
that they submit the cause for final decision on the bill and answer, but there is no
submission on the complainant's part; and it is only the motion to dissolve, which
was made as aforesaid by the defendants' counsel on putting in their answer, that
the Chancellor can decide on at present without the complainant's consent.

In fact the principles and practice of this court seem, on this occasion, not to have
been recollected. It is therefore proper to say something relative to the said princi-
ples and practice.

When a bill is filed stating, on oath, just grounds to be relieved from a judgment
at law, the complainant, on filing likewise a bond with sureties approved by the
Chancellor, for securing to the defendants the money recovered nisi, &c. obtains an
order for an injunction, which is to continue until further order. If the defendant,
by his answer on oath, denies those matters, on which the injunction was obtained,
on motion to the Chancellor he generally obtains an order dissolving the injunction.
The complainant, however, if he thinks proper, may proceed, after the dissolution,
to establish, by proof, the allegations of his bill; and if he succeeds, either the
injunction is renewed, or other relief is granted by the final decree, as is proper for
the circumstances of the case.

Every complainant, on the filing of the answer by the defendant, is entitled to
have the cause set down for final hearing on the bill and answer. And for this plain
reason : by so doing he admits every thing contained in the answer to be true, and
that nothing contained in his bill is true except what is admitted by the answer. So
that it is impossible for the defendant to be injured by a submission on bill and an-
swer. But, if a defendant were entitled to have the cause set down on bill and answer,
it Is plain, that he could thereby preclude the complainant from the opportunity of
establishing his bill by indifferent testimony, and would in short have the cause only
in his own power. For, it cannot be unknown, that on final hearing, nothing
alleged in the bill is to be considered established unless admitted by the answer, or
proved by indifferent testimony. If indeed the defendant were entitled to have the
cause set down for-final hearing, on bill and answer, it must be on terms similar to
those of the complainant's setting down; viz. that every thing contained in the bill
is true, that is to say, the rule must be reversed. But there is no such practice, nor
does it by any means, in the present case, appear to be the meaning of the defendants
10 admit the complainant's allegations. On the contrary, they have denied, so far as
they can deny, the said allegations.

There never has been a case in this court, where the defendant had less reason

26