In answer to these Questions -- the Defendants deny all Contrivance Combination or Confederacy charged in the Complainants Bill ; Declare that they never use any Means Arguments or other Devices to prevent or that by any such Ways and Means Warrants or Orders have been prevented, by and from the Justices & Vestry men in Behalf of the Complainant.

And they positively deny that such Refusal has been made at their joint or seperate request or by their joint or several Means Influence Contrivance Procurement &c.

1. Noy's Maxims No. 6.

2. 1 Eq. Ab. 482 n 21; 2 prWms. 154.156. VinCh. Letter Sn 1. 2; 2Eq. Ab. 4S2 n 17 n 19 1 pr Wms. 620 Vin. Fraud, 55 n 9

PAPEPvS RELATING TO CHURCHES IN QUEENS COUNTY. 335

How little these answers consist with Candor or Truth will l^^ seen from the Depositions noted in the margin, *

The Circumvention and Fraud thus fully established we insist that the authorities clearly apply, and that the Power of the Court to relieve must whatever may be the Construction of the act -- be manifest and unquestionable.

As to the lid. Head of Enquiry -- Whether there are sufficient Parties before the Court to justify a Decree ? We observe 1^^ That it seems to be involved in the first Head ; for if from the peculiar Nature & Circumstances of this Cause the Complainant is entitled to Relief independent of the mode prescribed by the act there can be no necessity of making the Justices or Vestrymen Parties, who not being possessed of the money, could be called upon only as it was their office to make out the Warrants for the Salary.