enrolment. And in this respect it is immaterial whether the decree or order be one of the Master of the Rolls-or of the Vice Chancellors-or of the Lord Chancellor: for, as observed by Lord Cottenham, in the case of Brooke v. Champernowne (), "when the decree is enrolled, the Court of Chancery ceases to have jurisdiction over it."

There is an ingenious argument in Mr. Daniell's Chancery Practice ("); the object of which is to prove that although it be necessary to enrol a decree pronounced by the Master of the Rolls, or by the Vice-Chancellor, it is not necessary to enrol a decree pronounced by the Lord Chancellor himself; for which distinction this reason is assigned—that when the decree is by the Lord Chancellor himself, it requires no enrolment to make it his decree. In sustaining this argument, however, the learned author encounters the judgment of Lord Chancellor Brougham, in the case of Parker v. Downing (); where his lordship held (conformably to all precedent and authority) that if a decree for an account could not be enrolled (which was contended in that case), the consequence would be "to withdraw every such case from the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords;" an observation which clearly shows that, in Lord Brougham's opinion, a decree or order not enrolled is not appealable in Parliament.

But all doubt seems to be removed by the terms of the Standing Order No. 118 (), which makes the date of enrolment the period from which the time limited for bringing appeals is to be calculated (*). This order contemplates enrolment as indispensable in every case.

(c) 4 Cl. and Fin., 254. () 2 Vol. Part. ii. 674. () 1 Myl. & Ke., 634.

(1) See Appendix, No. 1.

(8) See Brooke v. Champernowne, ante, chap. 2. p. 114.

PRACTICE

ON

ENGLISH AND IRISH APPEALS.

CHAPTER THE FOURTH.

Necessary Parties,

торшерит

appeal

Colore Mathwell 5ter 5484 Huttolove, thereby 4077149

General Rule, 123.-That the Decree is right as to certain Parties no reason for omitting those Parties, ib.-Party who did not appear below, 124, or against whom Cause heard upon a Sequestration, ib.Parties refusing to join as Appellants will be made Respondents, ib.

THE general rule is, that all persons who were made parties in the court below, must be made parties, or cited to appear as parties, in the House of Lords.

That the decree or order complained of, may be conceived to be right, and unobjectionable, in so far as it affects the interest of certain parties to the suit, is no reason for omitting to make those parties, parties to the appeal. Thus

Townsend v. Warren, 21 May, 1817.-A petition was presented by the appellant setting forth that, in his appeal to their Lordships, he had omitted to pray that an order to answer should issue against William and Richard Morpen, by reason that the petitioner was advised that the decree appealed from, in so far as it affected them, was right. That the case came on for hearing; and, on the opening thereof, the House observing that these persons were not made parties to the appeal, refused to proceed further therein; and therefore praying that their Lordships' order to answer might be directed to the said parties.-Ordered as prayed.

A person made a party below, in the character of trustee, but who by his answer stated that he had never acted as trustee, and who had made no appearance at the hearing, was, nevertheless, ordered to be summoned as a party to the appeal. So also a party who not only had made no appearance at the hearing, but against whom the cause had been heard upon a sequestration. Thus

Barrett v. Bourke, 7 March, 1816.-On the petition of the appellant setting forth that the appeal was set down for hearing; that Mary Nash and William Harold were parties to the suit in the court below, and appeared by the decree to have an interest in the pleas in question; but as they had not appeared when the cause was heard, and as Harold had by his answer stated that he had never acted as a trustee, and as the case was heard upon a sequestration against the said Mary Nash, the petitioner did not conceive it necessary to make them parties to the appeal, or to serve them with notice thereof. That, however, it had been since thought advisable to serve them with a summons to attend on the appeal, and therefore praying that the hearing might be adjourned for a month.

A petition of the respondent was also presented, setting forth that the appeal had been in the paper for hearing on the 1st, 4th, and 6th March; and therefore praying that the appellant might be ordered to pay to the petitioner, or to Mr. Wood his solicitor, the expenses incurred by him in attending on these several days by his counsel and solicitor, as a condition of adjourning the said appeal. This petition was referred to the Appeal Committee, who reported that the appellant might be at liberty to amend his said appeal upon condition of paying the costs incurred by the respondents, in consequence of the appellant not having made the proper parties respondents in the first instance.-Ordered accordingly.

Where it appears that persons having an interest in the subject of the litigation, and who were parties to the proceedings in the court below, refuse to join as appellants, the House, on an appeal by other parties, will order the parties refusing to join as appellants, to be made respondents. Thus

Stackpoole v. Stackpoole, 20 March, 1815.-Counsel having been heard on the original and on the cross appeal, and consideration being had of the cause, it was ordered that the said appeals should stand over, and that the appellants in each of them should be at liberty in six weeks from

that day, to amend their petitions of appeal by making the several other persons parties to the proceedings in the court below parties to such appeals respectively; and thereupon to bring the said appeals to be heard again without delay.

Representations were subsequently made in course of the same session by petitions on behalf of the appellants in the principal, and in the cross appeal, setting forth that the several persons aforesaid had refused to join as appellants, and therefore praying that the petitioners' respective petitions might be considered and taken as amendments of their respective appeals, and that their Lordships would grant orders of summons to the several persons aforesaid, and to put in their answers to the said appeals. -Ordered as prayed upon both petitions.

In certain cases where it appears that a necessary party has been omitted, the House will not permit the hearing to proceed, but will retain the appeal, in order that such necessary party, or his representative, may be summoned.

Townsend v. Warren, 21 May, 1817.-Petition of the appellant setting forth that by a mistake and inadvertency he had omitted to pray for an order to answer against Cornelius Townsend, who at the time of presenting the appeal was living, but who had subsequently departed this life, and the cause having come on for hearing on the opening thereof, the House observed the want of necessary parties, and refused to proceed further therein, and therefore praying that the said appeal might be retained until the suit should be revived against the personal representatives of the said Cornelius Townsend.-Ordered as prayed.

But it is the duty of the respondent to take the objection of want of parties, before putting in his answer; for if he treat the appeal as effective and regular by answering it, the objection of want of parties will not, in general, induce the House to stop the hearing (a).

(a) Small v. Attwood, 6 Cl. and Fin. 280.

PRACTICE

ON

ENGLISH AND IRISH APPEALS.

CHAPTER THE FIFTH.

Notice of the Appeal.

Notice of Intention to Appeal, 126.-Must be given to all the Respondents, 127.-Certificate of Notice, ib.-Applications to present without notice, 128.-Ought to be confined to that object, 129.

THE requirement of the standing order No. 180 (), as to notice, is as follows; viz. :

:

To prevent delay on the part of the respondent, or respondents, to any petition of appeal presented to the House in delivering their printed cases pursuant to the Standing Orders, that previously to any petition of appeal being presented to the House, a notice shall be given to the agent or agents of the party or parties in the court below, who shall be made respondent or respondents to the said appeal-of the time when such petition of appeal is intended to be presented to the House; and the day on which such notice was given, or caused to be given, shall be endorsed by the agent or agents for the petitioner on the back of the said appeal.

No particular form of notice is prescribed. It may be as follows:

In the Court of Chancery, between A. B, plaintiff, and C. D, defendant.

Take notice, that on the

day of

(a) See Appendix, No.

or as soon afterwards as