Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/546

 534 FEDBBAL BBPORTBB. �hearing at a day named. There was no order made upon defendants' Bolicitor, nor suggestion as to notice apon plain- tifs and their solioitora ; hence, the allegations in the bill of review now before the court, so far as they are based on the conduct of the defendants' soliciter in that respect, are entirely groundless ; yet, on demurrer, they must be taken as true. The court, desiring to pursue its business in an orderly manner, and with proper dispatch, did, according to its practice, call the equity docket, and take such action, with regard to each case called, as the circumstances required. The original case, having been set down for hear- ing, was not reached in due course for some days thereafter. No one appeared for plaintiffs, but defendants were duly represented. The court examined the pleadings, exhibits, and proofs, and ordered a decree for defendants. Whatever was dorie was not through lack of courtesy or otherwise on the part of defendants' soliciter, but on the positive requirement of the court that the case should proceed. This action of the court was based on the necessity of its business, viz. : that some one should respond to the call of the case. The defendants responded, and the court proeeeded aecordingly, the time for taking testimony having expired, and no exten- sion asked. �A bill of review bas been filed, to which a demurrer is interposed. In the case of Whiting v. Bank of U. S, 13 Pet. 6, it is said : �"As the original decree, which it seeksto review, was properly, accord- ing to our course of practice, to be deemed recorded and enrolled as of the term in which the final decree was passed, it is certain ly a bill of review in contradistlnction to an original bill in the nature of a bill pf review; which latter bill brings forward the interests aftected by the decree, other than those which are founded in privity of representation. * * # * It has also been suggested at the bar that no bill lies for errors of law, except where such errors are apparent on the face of the decree of the court. That is true in the senae in which the language is used in the EngUsh practice. In England the decree always recites the substance of the bill, answer, and pleadings, and also the f acts on which the court founds its decree. But in America the decree does not ordinarily recite either the bill or answer or pleadings, and generally not the facts, on which the decree is founded. But with us the bilj, answer, and other pleadings, to.iccther with the decree, constitute what is properly considered as Ihe ��� �