
    PORTER v. PORTER.
    Error — bill of particulars — copies—evidence.
    A bill of particulars should contain a brief statement of the charges relied upon: it need rrds &ive a copy of the evidence to be offered to prove it.
    Error to the Court of Common Pleas. The case below was assumpsit. At the trial the plaintiff offered in evidence an execution, which had been in the hands of the defendant as constable, together with his return upon it, with a view to show money in his hands for the plaintiff.
    The defendant objected to this, because he had called for a bill of particulars of the plaintiff, and he furnished in it no copy of the execution. The court below overruled the objection, and for their error in this, it is sought to reverse the judgment.
   Wood, J.

The law requires of either party when called on, to give a bill of particulars of their demands to their adversaries, and confines their proof to the bill furnished. The bill in this case contained the charge of money received on the execution, but gave no copy of the execution itself. The law does not require copies of evidence in a bill of particulars, but only a brief bill of the charges or claims; that was given here. The judgment is affirmed with costs-  