LINGAN v. HENDERSON.

his bill; for otherwise it must be dismissed. But, if the bill prays
generally for such relief as is suited to the nature of the case, then,
under such general prayer, the court may, regardless of, or without
any special prayer, grant any such relief as may be allowed by law,
in consistency with the nature of the case, whether the plaintiff
asks for it orally or not ;(k) and even although it should be more
beneficial to him than that which he has specially prayed for ;(1)
of which the defendant is held to have been sufficiently notified,
and is presumed to have been prepared to meet. For it is in many
cases as much upon a defendant to look to what is prayed against
him as to what is stated.(m)

These plaintiffs have by their bill made to the court three distinct
prayers; first, that the administratrix of John Henderson be com-
pelled to pay the purchase money, with interest; secondly, that
the heirs of John Henderson reconvey the land; and thirdly, that
they, the plaintiffs, may have such relief as to the court shall seem
meet and consistent with equity. The two first of these prayers
have been made to correspond with the alternatives of their case;
either that the contract between James M. Lingan and John Hen-
derson was to be considered as a sale, in which case the plaintiffs
ask for the payment of the purchase money, or that, if it should be
treated as a trust, then the heirs of Henderson should be ordered
to reconvey the land to the heirs of Lingan. But as the peculiar
nature of the case might suggest the propriety or necessity of
granting relief in some other than either of those two specified
modes, they have, in general terms, prayed for such relief as may
be deemed proper. Consequently the plaintiffs may be relieved in
one way or other, unless there should be found to be something in
their bill to prevent it; or unless the claim of these plaintiffs should
appear to have been in some way barred, or should be found to be
not sufficiently authenticated by proof.

This case had its origin in a contract between James M. Lingan
and John Henderson. Contemplating it therefore as an agreement
between them alone, as now living, to be, as stated in the bill,
either a conveyance of a tract of land in trust for a particular
purpose, and then to be reconveyed; or as an actual sale of so
much land to be paid for at a stipulated price, still it is one entire

(fc) Beaumont v. Boultbee, 5 Ves. 495.—-(1) Durant v. Durant, 1 Cox. 58.
(m) Manaton v. Molesworth, 1 Eden, 26; Roche v. Morgell, 2 Scho. & Lefr. 729;
Polk v. Clinton, 11 Ves. 65; Hiern v. Mill, 13 Yes. 119; Jones v. The Parishes of
Montgomery, Sec., 3 Swan, 208; Wilkinson v. Beal, 4 Mad. 408; Mitf. M. 88.