|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEALE v. HAGTHROP. 567
tatives of Anthony Hook, deceased; ' and, in the body of his an-
swer he says, 'during all which time several of the complainants
resided in the neighbourhood of the land. ' And others of the de-
fendants seem to have an eye to some other complainant besides
Male. These respondents appear, in this respect, to have turned
their attention to some of the irrelevant circumstances stated in
the bill, without sufficiently regarding its substance. But all such
expressions and allusions in the answers must in like manner, be
rejected as surplusage.
So much as to the excrescences, the foreign matter and mere
careless verbiage of the bill and some of the answers. But before
we proceed to consider the merits of the case it will be necessary
to ascertain from these pleadings, as accurately as practicable,
what is the matter in issue; and what part of the allegations of
each has been admitted, taken for true, or is to be sustained or
combated by proof. In relation to these matters it will be neces-
sary to explain, recollect and apply some of the general rules in
relation to answers.
The first of these general rules, which have a bearing upon this
case, is, that where the general replication is put in, and the par-
ties proceed to a hearing, all the allegations of the answer, which
are responsive to the bill, shall be taken for true; unless they are
disproved by two witnesses, or by one witness with pregnant cir-
cumstances. The answer to this extent is considered as evidence,
and conclusive unless disproved, even although the defendant may
have a direct and palpable interest in establishing the truth of what
he advances, (p) An answer is only so far responsive as it an-
swers to a material statement or charge in the bill as to which a
disclosure is sought; and which is the subject of parol proof, but
no further. Where a deed, or instrument of writing is necessary
to establish any right, and the bill requires the evidence of such
right, the answer, unaccompanied and unsupported by such deed
or writing, will be no evidence although it should directly respond
to the bill; because the answer is only in the nature of parol evi-
dence; and, in such case evidence of a higher grade is required by
law. (?)
But where the bill asks for the production of evidence, which
from the nature of the plaintiff's case, he has a right to claim;
(p) Lenox v. Prout, 3 Wheat 527, —(q) Brown v. Selwin, Ca. Temp. Tal. 242;
Hayward v. Carroll, 4 H. & J. 521; Jones v. Slubey, 5 H. & J. 381.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
