CHANCERY. 513

proper, shall be at liberty to make a decree, saving the rights of the absent
parties, or may require the plaintiff to bring in such absent party, upon
such terms as the court may prescribe as to costs.

Secs. 196 to 200 referred to—see notes to sec. 197. Brown v. Scott, 138 Md. 240.

An. Code, sec. 185. 1904, sec. 176. 1888, sec. 163. Rule 33.

200. Where the defendant shall, by his demurrer or answer, suggest
that the bill is defective for want of parties, the plaintiff shall be at liberty
within fifteen days after answer filed, to set down the cause for argument
upon that objection only; and the clerk, at the instance of the plaintiff,
shall make entry thereof in his docket in the following form: " Set down
upon the defendant's objection for want of parties." And if the plaintiff
shall not set down the cause, but shall proceed therewith to a hearing, not-
withstanding the objection for want of parties taken by the answer, he
shall not, at the hearing of the cause, if the defendant's objection for want
of parties be then allowed, be entitled as of course, to an order for liberty
to amend his bill by adding parties; but the court or judge thereof may,
if it be thought fit, dismiss the bill. If, however, the cause be set down upon
the objection taken, and, upon hearing, the objection be allowed, the plain-
tiff shall have liberty to amend, upon paying the cost of amendment.

Where the answer sets up a want of proper parties, and the plaintiff fails to have
the matter specially set for hearing as provided in this section, if the court finally
holds that proper parties have not been made, the bill may be dismissed. How the
failure of the answer to point out what parties have been omitted, should be taken
advantage of. Mishler v. Finch, 104 Md. 185.

The question of whether proper parties have been made, must be determined
before the bill is dismissed under this section, and that question is reviewable on
appeal. Ridgely v. Wilmer, 97 Md. 728.

Secs. 196 to 200 referred to—see notes to sec. 197. Brown v. Scott, 138 Md. 240.

As to amendment in equity, see secs. 17, 176 and 187.

An. Code, sec. 186. 1904, sec. 177. 1888, sec. 164. Rule 48.

201. All final decrees, and orders in the nature of final decrees, shall
be considered as enrolled from and after the expiration of thirty days from
the date of the same, the day of the date inclusive.

This section applied. Before a decree is enrolled it is within the province of the
court to revise or revoke it, and this is true where the decree is entered by default.
Norris v. Ahles, 115 Md. 65. And see Long v. Long, 115 Md. 135; Long Contracting
Company v. Albert, 116 Md. 114.

See notes to sec. 203.

An. Code, sec. 187. 1904, sec. 178. 1888, sec. 165. Rule 49.

202. Clerical mistakes in decrees or decretal orders, or errors arising
from any accidental slip or omission, may, at any time before the enroll-
ment of such decrees or orders, be corrected by order of the court or judge
thereof upon petition, without the form or expense of a rehearing.

This section referred to in deciding that a petition lay to rescind a decree after
it is enrolled. Whitlock Cordage Co. v. Hine, 125 Md. 107.
See notes to sec. 203.

An. Code, sec. 188. 1904, sec. 179. 1888, sec. 166. Rule 50.

203. Every petition for rehearing shall contain the special matter or
cause on which such hearing is applied for, and shall be signed by solicitor
18