
    A. Pell, and his Wife, (Executrix of E. Pugsley) against C. Pell, and his Wife.
    Where the husband and wife were sued jointly, on a bond executed by them jointly, the plaintiff was allowed (before plea) to entei a nolle prosequi as to the wife; and amend his declaration accordingly, as if the suit was against the husband alone, on payment of the costs of such amendment.
    
      MiCOUJY, for the plaintiffs, moved for leave to enter a nolle prosequi, as to the defendant, Martha Pell, and to amend the declaration, accordingly, against C. Pell, as if his wife had not been made defendant. The action was debt on a bond executed by the defendants, jointly, to Elizabeth Pugsley, the testatrix; and the plaintiff declared against them as joint obligors. The defendant served a demurrer to the declaration, (which had been filed de lene esse,) assigning, as a special cause, that the action was brought against the husband and wife, jointly, when it ought to have been against the husband alone. But the plaintiff’s attorney returned the demurrer, because no special bail had been filed in the cause.
    
      SUliman, contra,
    objected, that where a wife is made a party, the plaintiff cannot enter a nolle prosequi; but must discontinue, and commence a new action against the husband alone. (1 Chitty’s Pl. 32, 33. Tidd’s Pr. 631. Chandler v. Parkes and Danks, 3 Esp. N. P. Rep. 76.)
   Per Curiam.

Motion granted, on payment of the costs occasioned by the amendment.

Rule accordingly.  