Majority
p. 9William Mackie and others adsm. William Cairns and others. 1823. Oct. 30.
Headnote
Exceptions to an answer being referred to a master, it is not necessary for the defendant who has argued the exceptions, to attend again before the master, and make objections on the summons, to hear the report. This case forms an exception to the general rule, according to which, a party intending to except, must state his objections, on hearing the diaft of the report.Mr. R. Sedgwick for the defendants,
moved to bring on the argument on the exceptions to the master’s report, made upon exceptions taken to the answer.
Mr. Slosson as a preliminary objection, stated, that the defendant had not appeared before the master to make his objections on the summons to hear the report. 3 John. ch. 80. 87.; Wyatt’s Prac. Reg. 381.
Messrs. Sedgwick and Emmet.
The rule in the cases cited, does not apply to a case like the present; but only to exceptions to a report after hearing. There can he no reason for its application to a report on exceptions to an answer, which have been once argued before the master.
• Mr. Slosson contended that the rule was general, and did not admit of exception; that the summons offered an oppofunity to the party to state his objections for the consideration
p. 10
of the master in the first instance, and thereby, possibly, to prevent further litigation.
The reason of this case forms an exception to the general rule. The party has once appeared before the master, and made his objections to the exceptions. In this case, the objections are pointed to the exceptions which are precise and certain; in other cases they are not. The master has had an opportunity once of hearing and considering the objections. It would be useless for the defendant to appear again before the master, and require him to reconsider the same objections.
Let the argument proceed.