500 MAYER v. TYSON.

April 1828; provided a copy be served, 7c. Which having been
served as required, the matter was submitted.

21st April, 1828.—BLAND, Chancellor.—Ordered, that the excep-
tions of the plaintiffs to the answer of the defendant Thomas Tyson
be and they are hereby ruled good; and that he make a sufficient
answer to all the several matters and allegations of the bill on or
before the second day of June next, or the same may, after that
day, be taken pro confesso.

The time allowed by this order for putting in a sufficient answer
having elapsed, and the defendant Thomas Tyson having failed to
answer as required, the plaintiffs brought the matter before the
court, and moved that the case might proceed as against him, and
the other defendants.

10th July, 1828.—BLAND, Chancellor.—Where the answer of
the only person who has been made a defendant is, upon excep-
tions, held to be insufficient, the plaintiff is authorized, according
to the English course of proceeding, to take the case up where it
stood when the insufficient answer was filed, and proceed thence-
forward against the defendant, so as to have him committed to cus-
tody until he does answer, or to have the bill taken pro confesso ;
because an insufficient answer is as no answer at all.(a) And so,
where only one of the defendants stands in the situation of not
having answered sufficiently, the like course must be had against
him alone, so as to enable the plaintiff to proceed with effect against
the other defendants.(6)

Upon this principle, and as it has been provided by our acts of
Assembly, that, where a defendant fails to answer, the bill may be
taken pro confesso ;(c) so here where only one of the defendants
has contumaciously neglected to put in a sufficient answer, after
his first had been determined to be insufficient, it must be allowa-
ble and is essentially necessary, to have the bill taken pro confesso
as against him alone, so as to enable the plaintiff to proceed safely
and with effect against him together with the other defendants.

Whereupon it is decreed, that the bill of complaint be and the
same is hereby taken pro confesso as against the defendant Thomas
Ttyson; and the plaintiffs are allowed further to proceed with their

(a) Child v. Brabson, 2 Ves, 110; Turner v. Turner, Dick. 316; Davis v. Davis,
2 Atk, 24; Darwent v. Walton, 2 Atk. 510; Gregor v. Ld. Arundel, 8 Ves. 83.
(b) 1 Fow. Exch. Pra. 199; Royall v. Johnson, 1 Rand. 421.—(c) 1799, ch. 70, s. 1;
Clapham v. Clapham, ante, 126.