1778-02-10 (static/transcriptions/1778/02/018.jpg)

1778. Sittings. [Tuesday] Feb. 10.

without any mention when it was the usage. On the objections mention’d by Impey, the Advocates for the Company were desirous of withdrawing the present Justification and giving another; The Advocates of the Plaintiff consented to put off the Trial till next Term on the Defendant’s consenting in all events, to pay the Taxed Costs of the Plaintiff, and consenting that if the Plaintiff had Judgment it should be, as if the Cause had been now tried: that is of the fourth day of next Term, although the Trial was now appointed to be the Sixth day of next Term. This I remark’d would prevent the Defendant moving in arrest of Judgment. Impey answer’d the Defendant by consent may relinquish that right, and on an appeal the rule for Judgment as of a time pass’d by consent would be sent with the Judgment and would have the same operation as a consent, not to move in arrest of Judgment. He said it was common in England for the Parties to consent, not to move in arrest of Judgment, not to bring a Bill in Equity,; not to sue a Writ of Error: and here if Parties would by consent preclude themselves from an appeal, we should on that
/ consent