but the said C D did, at the time of such demand aforesaid, refuse to pay the two several sums of money above mentioned, or either of them, or any part thereof, and the same still remains wholly due and unpaid to this deponent. Sworn, &c.

Affidavit of Service of a Copy of Demand and Refusal, &c. before proceeding by Attachment.

In the King's Bench, (or, &c.)

A B, of G, maketh oath and saith, that he, this deponent, on, &c. from, &c. until, &c, at, &c. [the day, hours, and place, mentioned in the award,] did personally attend for the purpose of receiving the sum of 7. awarded in and by a certain award in writing hereunto annexed, to be then and there paid to this deponent by the therein named C D ; but that the said C D did not in person, or by his attorney or agent, attend at the time and place above mentioned, or pay to this deponent the said sum of 1., or any part thereof: And the said A B further saith, that on

in this present

mission of the said A B, and the

next after Term, the sub

said C D, to the

said award, contained in a certain bond or obligation bearing date, &c. was made a rule or order of this honourable Court; and that he the said A B did, on, &c. personally serve the said C D with a true copy of the said rule or order and award, and, at

the same time shewed him the said original rule or order and award, and demanded of him the payment of the said sum of 1. so awarded to the said A B as aforesaid; but the said C D did not then pay, nor hath at any time since paid the same, or any part thereof, to the said A B, but the whole of the said sum of 1. still remains due and un

paid to the said A B. Sworn, &c.

A. B.

Affidavit of the due Execution of an Award, in order to ground a Motion for an Attachment.

In the King's Bench, &c.

AB, of G, maketh oath and saith, that he the said

A B did,(a) on the

the year of Our Lord

, see C D, of H, sign, scal, and publish his award in writing between E F, of L, and F G, of M, bearing date the

day of

, in the year of Our Lord

And the said A B further saith, that the name C D, set and subscribed to the said award as the party executing the same, is of the proper hand-writing of the said C D; and that the names of A B and P R, set and subscribed to the said award as witnessing the execution of the same, are of the respective hand-writing of the said A B and the said PR. Sworn, &c.

(a) Vid. Dict. per Gibbs, Ch. J. Wohlenberg v. Lageman,

579.

A. B.

Marshall Rep.

Rule Nisi for an Attachment for Non-Payment of a Sum of Money, and of taxed Costs, in pursuance of an Award.

In the Common Pleas,

Term, &c.

A B v. C D.—Upon reading a rule made in this cause, on, &c. the affidavit of P R, and the award of S T thereto annexed, and the affidavit of A B, the plaintiff in this cause, it is ordered that the defendant, upon notice of this rule to be given to him, shall shew cause to this Court, on

next, why an attachment of contempt should not be issued forth against him, for non-payment of the sum of

1. awarded to be due to the said plaintiff, and also for non-payment of the sum of

7. for the costs of the said plaintiff, incurred in and about the said arbitration.

ADDENDA.

A. p. 13.-See also the case of Goodson and another v. Brookes, (a) which was as follows:-A policy of insurance had been subscribed by the defendant for one Baines, his agent, and a loss having subsequently occurred, Baines, on behalf of the defendant, agreed to submit the matter to arbitration. The award directed the underwriters to pay a certain sum per cent., to recover which, the present action was brought. There was no direct proof of Baines's authority to refer; but it appeared that he was in the habit of settling losses for the defendant, which the defendant afterwards paid. GIBBS, Ch. J., held that this was a sufficient evidence of agency to render the award binding upon the defendant; and the plaintiff had a verdict.

B. p. 13. line 11.-It does not appear, in this case, whether the parishioners gave any express authority to the six to submit for them; but the award, affecting all of them, was held good; and, at all events, the six would be answerable for the disobedience of others of the parishioners to its directions.

C. p. 14. line 1.-At the time when this paragraph was written, I was not aware of the case of Filmer v. Delber.(b) in which the Court of Common Pleas were moved to set

(a) 4 Camp. N. P. C. 163.

(b) 3 Taunt. 436. See Dict.I. M. & S. 719.

aside an order of Nisi Prius, by which a cause had been referred to arbitration, upon an affidavit by the defendant, stating that she had expressly desired her attorney not to consent to any rule of reference: the arbitrators had not, at the time of the motion, taken any steps in adjusting the matter, except appointing a future day for a meeting.

Mansfield, Ch. J., said that, in a case like the present, where an express agreement to refer had been regularly entered into bycounsel and attorney,the only remedy of the party, supposing herself aggrieved, was against the attorney; if applications of this nature were encouraged, there would be no end of the Court's interference: besides, that it would lead to collusion; when a party did not like the prospect of a reference, he would say he had never given authority to his client to refer.

D. p. 17. line 8.-Add here to the words "cannot be made a rule of Court,"-under the statute of William. And the reason assigned was, that the intent of the act was to enforce such awards as would make an end of all controversies between the parties whose quarrels were submitted; which could not be in this case, because B would not be bound by an award made by virtue of such a submission; and if process of the Court should issue against A, it would be only for breach of promise.

E.p. 19. line 5.-A submission for partition of lands cannot be made a rule of Court, for the statute of William extends only to quarrels for which there is no other remedy, but by personal action or suit in equity.(c)

F. p. 35. line 10.-After" delivered," add," and before the submission was made a rule of Court, one of the parties, &c." Then at line 13. same page, after " occasion," add," where the Court were moved for an attachment for "non-performance of the award, and, on the other side,

(c) Smallwood and others v. Christopher, M. T. 3 Geo. 1., Sir Peter King's Rer. C. B.