1787-11-27 (static/transcriptions/1787/11/464.jpg)

As to it’s being sufficient if the Answer be good to a common Intent, Harrison’s Chancery practiser (pa: 303 Vol: 1) explains what is meant by that “If (says he) the Answer be good to a common Intent the Plaintiff must reply, and prove the Matter of his Bill to be true, if he can, and not insist upon the Insufficiency of the Answer; but this must be intended of Things transated publickly, whereof there may be a general Cognisance; for of Matters done by the Defendant privately, & resting in his own knowledge only, he ought to answer particularly and certainly.