The decree being drawn up and approved, and signed in chancery by the chancellor, it is engrossed on rolls of parchment and deposited amongst the records of the court as a perpetual evidence of the proceedings. If, however, either party thinks himself aggrieved by the decree, he may, before its enrollment, petition the court for a re-hearing. Six months are allowed to the party gaining the cause to enroll the decree; if he delay it till after that time, he must apply to the court to enroll it nunc pro tunc, which is granted of course.2 2 The enrollment of decrees is now very rare in England; and seems to be in all cases unnecessary. In the United States all decrees in equity, as well as judgment at law, are matters of record, and are deemed to be enrolled, as of the term of the court at which they are declared, whether they are so in fact or not. CHAPTER XI. OF RE-HEARING A CAUSE IN EQUITY.1 The re-hearing a cause in equity can only be obtained while the decree is in transitu and incomplete; for after it has received the signature of the chancellor it can only be revised by supplemental bill. The method of obtaining a re-hearing is by entering a caveat with the proper officer, against the enrollment of the decree, and presenting a petition to the court requesting the indulgence of such re-hearing. This caveat proceeds upon the principle of preventing the inconvenience which has frequently been found to result from the too speedy signing of the decree; and it suspends the signature one lunar month from the time that it is presented to the judge for enrollment. The petition must state particularly the objections which are conceived to lie against the decree, that the court may be competent to decide upon the propriety of the application, and if the whole decree is objected to, the case of the petitioners and the decretal part of the order are shortly set forth; and an intimation is given of the decree which the petitioners are advised ought to The orders of court require that a petition for re-hearing should be signed by two barristers, as a security that the application is not made for the purpose of delay. 1It would have been impracticable in a treatise of this nature to give an account of the practice in the different courts of the United States. It may be well to warn the student, that the English practice has been modified in this country, by local rules and statutes, and that the text can only be appealed to, as furnishing a general outline of the course of proceeding. Form of a Petition for Re-Hearing. To the Right Honorable the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain. In a cause wherein James Willis, by John Willis his father and next friend, is complainant, and Edward Willis and William Willis, are defendants. The humble petition of the defendant showeth, that your petitioners find themselves much aggrieved by a decretal order made in this cause by your lordship, the day of, whereby your petitioner is ordered and directed to pay unto John Willis for the benefit of James Willis, an infant, the sum of £800, etc., such sum having been long since paid, and proof thereof made, as your petitioners conceive and are advised. Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that your lordship will be pleased to vouchafe a re-hearing in this cause, before your lordship; they submitting to pay what costs the court shall award in case their complaint be found groundless; and your petitioners will pray, etc. G. MADDOCKS. A. STAINSBY. This petition is left with the chancellor or the master of the rolls, who seldom refuses to subscribe his fiat for a re-hearing. Upon the re-hearing, all the evidence taken in the case, whether produced before or not, is now permitted to be read; for it is the decree of the same court which now sits only to hear reasons why it should not be enrolled and perfected; at which time, all omissions of either evidence or argument conductive to their information may be supplied. The form of the decree upon a re-hearing differs from the first decree only by a recital of such other proceedings as have been since had in the cause, thus Whereas, by an order or decree of the right honorable, day of, it was the lord chancellor, made on the ordered and (reciting the first decree) with which order the defendant being dissatisfied, petitioned his lordship for a re-hearing of the said cause, and to have the order rectified in several particulars; and thereupon, by an order bearing date, etc., it was ordered that the said cause should be re-heard the fendant's depositing £ day of -, upon the dewith the register; and the defendant deposited the said sum of £, and the cause coming on to be heard in the presence of counsel, etc., the counsel for the defendant insisted that, etc. (here is set forth the substance of the defendants' arguments as recited in the order of re-hearing), whereas, the counsel for the plaintiff insisted that, etc. (the substance of the argument for the plaintiff;) whereupon, this court did declare and decree, that, etc. (as in the decree upon rehearing). THURLOW, C. WI No further obstacles can now be opposed to the enrollment of the decree, which is then completely perfected, and is deposited with the records of the court, there to remain in perpetuam rei memoriam. CHAPTER XII. OF THE EXECUTION OF DECREES. THE decree being now perfected, a mandate of the court is awarded to enjoin its performance. It is a general principle, that the court of chancery has power to issue all process necessary to carry its decrees into effectual execution. When the decree is in personam, i. e., directed against the person of the defendant, as for the payment of money, the process is a writ of execution, and upon its failure, a writ of sequestration.' But if the decree is 1 The ancient method of compelling the observance of a decree, was by spending the whole process of the court, by attachment, proclamation, commission of rebellion, and sergeant-at-arms. But in the time of Chancellor Elesmere, a defendant having been taken upon one of the processes, and still retaining a sum of money which was decreed to the plaintiff, his lordship ordered a sequestration. About the latter end of the reign of Queen Anne, they began to shorten the process for compelling the execution of the decree; for, by beginning with the attachment, and proceeding to the commission of rebellion, a twelve-month elapsed before the plaintiff could receive any benefit from the decree, they, therefore, adopted the method of serving the defendant with a copy of the decree, and, upon his neglecting to obey it, he was ordered to be committed; and the practice was then immediately to commit him to the Fleet; and upon the return of non est inventus, by the warden of the Fleet, the court ordered a sequestration. But this being complained of by the sergeant-at-arms, as an infringement upon his accustomed privileges, an order was made in the seventh year of George I., that there should be no sequestration, but upon the return of non est inventus by that officer. Since which period the practice has been, either to issue successively the several processes of the court, or, upon service of the decree, to obtain an order that the defendant should be committed for disobedience; and upon that order move for a sergeant-at-arms, and a sequestration upon |