According to present practice, a bill has become a much longer decla ration than formerly, which is partly owing to the more complicated nature of modern transactions, and partly to other causes. It is divided into various parts by modern writers, but in effect it only contains two parts, the declaration of the grievance and the prayer for relief. The declaration consists of what are technically called Statements and Charges ; the statements are or ought to be a clear exposition of the facts on which the plaintiff founds his title to relief ; and every fact which is necessary, either by itself or coupled with other facts, to support the plaintiff's prayer, should be sufficiently alleged. This rule, though it may appear vague, and would be useless to any person who attempted to draw a bill without experience in such matters, really contains all that can be said in general terms. The recent Chancery Amendment Act directs that " every bill shall contain as concisely as may be a narrative of the material facts, matters, and circumstances, on which the plaintiff relies, such narrative being divided into paragraphs numbered consecutively, and each paragraph containing, as nearly as may be, a separate and distinct statement or allegation, and shall pray specifically for the relief which the plaintiff may consider himself entitled to, and for general relief." .
The statements of a bill may be followed by charges, which the above enactment does not forbid, and which are not a mere repetition of the statements, but contain certain things or facts either already stated and alleged in the charges with more particularity for the purpose of obtaining an admission from the defendant, or they contain new facts of which in like manner the plaintiff wishes to obtain an admission as evidence in support of his statement and his prayer for relief. It is also usual in the charges to suggest the defendant's grounds of defence, for the purpose of ascertaining what they are, and generally to make all such charges as, if admitted or proved, would sustain the plaintiff's claim against the defendant. Another object is to discover what defence the defendant will make. But the main purpose of the charges is to obtain from the defendant what is technically called discovery, that is, evidence in support of the plaintiffs claim, either by the admissions in the defendant's answer, or from written papers in the possession or power of the defendant. This is the great distinction in present practice between a declaration at law and a bill in equity. Both state the plaintiff's demand and the foundation of it; but the bill in equity also contains a large part of what, if proved, would be the plaintiff's evidence. Now much of this matter which is charged in a bill may be and often is entirely false, and is invented by the plaintiff for the purpose of seeing whether he cannot extract some evidence favourable to himself from the defendant The plaintiff may invent or summit as much false matter as he pleases, but it must be matter of that kind, which, if true, would give him a right to that which ho demands of or against the defendant. Now the defendant
must, if required, answer all that the plaintiff distinctly alleges in his bill, provided it be material to the plaintiff's case, or he must demur or plead to it ; and he cannot demur, in the ease supposed, because lie thereby admits the plaintiff's case to be true, and therefore ho must admit that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief which ho preys. Thus theplaintiff, by means of the right which he has to compel an answer, incidentally may obtain the discovery, that is, the evidence, which he wishes to have. If the defendant can plead to the bill, he is not bound to answer beyond the plea; for a good plea is a complete answer to the whole bill, or to such part of the bill as it extends to.
Formerly, the charging part of a bill was followed by interrogatories, in which the whole of the matter stated and charged was repeated, and the defendant called upon to say yes or no, or give some explanation to every item. The recent Act has forbidden the insertion of inter rogatories in the bill, and the plaintiff, if his bill be such as requires an • answer, must file interrogatories for the examination of the defendants separately. The defendant need not answer except thus called upon, he may however do so spontaneously if he chooses.
"An answer is that which the defendant pleadeth or saith in Barre to avoid the plaintiff's bill or action, either by confession and avoiding, or by denying and traversing the material parts thereof." (West, 194.) Thus it appears that an answer in equity is in form tho same as a plea to the action at law. It must be a complete answer to everything sufficiently alleged and charged in the bill, at least to everything that is material to the plaintiff's claim. By the recent Act it is enacted, that " the answer may contain not only the answer of the defendant to the interrogatories, but such statements material to the case as the defendant may think it necessary or advisable to set forth therein, and such answer shall be divided into paragraphs numbered con secutively, each paragraph containing as nearly as may be, a separate and distinct allegation." A defendant, as already observed, must in proper form and in due time, as prescribed by the rules of the court, answer the interrogatories upon oath, unless he has privilege of peerage, or be a Quaker, or other person who is excused from taking an oath, in which case his statement on honour in the case of those who have privilege of peerage, and in the other case his solemn affirmation, IS sufficient. But the plaintiff may consent to take the answer without the defendant's oath or Cigna. ture, which is sometimes done. Those who are not Christians must swear to the truth of their answer in such form as the religion which they profess declares to be a binding form.