
    Brownson v. Reynolds.
    1825. May.
    If the complainant proceeds to compel an answer he need not take an order for the defendant to appear under the 115th general rule.
    The time for answering the bill in this cause, having ex-after appearance and a copy of the bill duly served, ^he g0jlcJtor for the complainants, upon affidavits of these facts, applied at the register’s office for process of attachment. He had not entered any rule for the defendant’s appearance pursuant to the 115th general rule, and did not conceive it necessary, as he did not wish to take the bill pro confesso, but meant to insist on an answer.
    The Register, entertaining doubts as to the construction of the rule, referred the question to the chancellor.
   The Court

thought that the rule to appear need not be entered, where the complainant proceeds by process of contempt to enforce an answer; and the attachment was issued.  