Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/190

 U A R4 Cases ruled and adjudged in the gpg;. ceive it as lpeeie. Upon a reference, the referrces awarded ott- vwrvly four pounds; and, as the caufe had been removcd lzthe de- fendant, it then became phquellion, whether the plaint' lhould recover double or any o er coils. Br rms Cciotrr :-Doulfle coils is a relative term ; and it has been fettled, that the plaintitfthall not recover double coils here, when, in the Court below, he could not be intitled to recover any. wersve tn em eem oem race ea_eo a ton. Tlnereare indeed exclulive words in the a&, but they do not comprehend thcprefent cafe. 'lhere mult, therefore, be. _ judgment without coils. Rue oufu F.r.uo·r. I R ala 'I`HE defendant had pleaded in abatement, that the plaintiff ' 3,, was a xfiwu tnwzrtz And now Hswell, for thc plaintiff, ’+ °?.;"°é2I°2; "°‘-"°‘"’·2$;‘.‘L"°"°"...‘Z.’i.‘2r“’.lZ‘€°ri‘ tnt as es o e u require. con a e eorild file theallidavit iryfanter, if thcCourt {hould deem it ne- eellinry in this cafe ; but Howell faid it was too late, and that a dilatory plea could not be recurred ro, at this llage of the proceed- BY Tue Covtrr :—As the plea is not fupported by any aE- davir it cannot be fullained - and we think it is too late to file a new; one. The defendant inuil, therefore, plead in chicfgot dt.: plaintif will be at liberty to lign judgment. Fmt! e·er_/iu S‘ro::£. THE plaintiff laid his damages at {gcc ; but the verdiét 60. and judgment nyi were for {672 13 2. The defendant 5f awa herenpon took out a writ of error, and next day the plaintiff S I ` mowed forleave to enter a wnzitritur of the furplus damages, upon {4* the authority of H. B/ack:. Rep. 643. 1 Dall. Rep. r 34. Elixir! op- fed it. P0But, mr rm: Couttr :—'l‘herc is no ditTctence between this cafe and that in Blacl/lone`: Report:. \’e lhall always be difpofed to favor amendments. Let the rmiimzm- be entered, upon pay- ment of the coils of the writ of error. i jouxs wijirr Nrcxota. THIS was a feigned iH`ue ; upon which this ting': quelliun was fubmitezl, for the opinion of the Court,-whether tlze power
 * J'°ndcr theniage aftélgivinig jurifdiétitgn ko utilities, Fheéarge

�