
    Jackson, ex dem. Rugbee and others, against Stiles, Gubert, tenant.
    Ejectment. The declaration was returnable at this term. The tenant held under a demise from Laussat and ⅛ , , . i Bouchaud; and sent them word, on receiving the declaration, that he should not defend; and that if they intended to protect the premises against the claim of the lessors of the plaintiff, they must attend to it; for he (the tenant) should not. On these facts,
    eJTandioid “a„y move to defend, at the term when the es-expresslyrefe-ed t0 appear'
    
      S. R. Hobble, moved that the landlords be made defendants ;
    and cited 1 R. L. 443, s. 29, 30; 1 Cowen, 135; 4 John. Rep. 492; 2 Dunl. Pr. 1022, 3; 4 Taunt. 820; Adams 6n Eject. 239, 240, and 361, App. No. 29.
    
      S. Sherwood, contra,
    submitted whether the application was not premature; and said that before the landlord could be received to defend alone, judgment should be given against the casual ejector.
   Curia.

The tenant expressly refused to appear. This was enough. The landlord need not wait till a default is entered against him.

Motion granted.  