256 THE BANK v. DUGAN.

because said defendant has not brought into this court the books
of account of said James Clarke, nor offered to do so; nor has he
produced and brought into this court, nor offered to do so, the
bond of said defendant to said Clarke; and has assigned no reason
for his omission to do so. The plaintiffs then go on to state six
other exceptions to the sufficiency of the answer; and then they
say tenth, because the said answer is accompanied by, or incorpo-
rates a plea which covers the whole matter of said bill of com-
plainant; and which, if good and sufficient, would render said
answer incompatible, expensive, and unnecessary. And is other-
wise, and in other respects evasive, and insufficient. Whereupon
an order was passed appointing a day for hearing these exceptions.
After which the matter was brought before the court

14th January, 1830.—BLAND, Chancellor.—The exceptions to
the answer of the defendant standing ready for hearing, and hav-
ing been submitted without argument, the proceedings were read
and considered.

In general, wherever a plaintiff has an interest in any books or
papers, which a defendant, by his answer, admits to be in his pos-
session, he may be ordered to produce them on petition of the
plaintiff, specifying what books or papers are wanted. (6) But, in
this instance, the plaintiffs, by their third exception, object to the
sufficiency of the answer; because, the defendant has not brought
into court the books of James Clarke, and the bond of the defen-
dant. So far as the bill calls for any disclosures respecting those
books, or that bond, which have not been answered, the answer
may be deemed insufficient and exceptionable; but, although the
production of those books and papers is a part of the discovery,
which this defendant, on his submitting to answer is bound to
make, yet the taking of exceptions to his answer, because of his
not producing them, is not the mode in which a defendant may be
compelled to produce books and papers for the benefit of the plain-
tiff in the progress of the ease, or at the final hearing; the appli-
cation to have any such documents, as a defendant admits to be in
his possession or under his control, brought in, must be made by
petition, (c) This third exception must therefore be overruled.

The defendant having submitted to answer, must, according to
the established rule, answer fully as to every fact in any way mate-

(b) Ringgold v. Jones, 1 Bland, 90, note; 2 Mad. Pr. Chan. 390; 1 Newland,
Chan. 199.-(c) 1 Harris. Pra. Chan. 322; Wagram Discovery, 14.