
    Norton against Barnum.
    To authorize a Judge's order to hold a 'lc[yyant to bail, in an ac~ tion for a libd, must not only state the libcly or cause of ac*= tion, but some for^granting
    On a motionof the dafe?d" a Judge’s orbalita ’supplemental affidavit of the plaintiff, to his^orighiai afMavit> 'XiK received.
    MOTION, in behalf of the defendant, that the order of W. Howell, first Judge of Ontario county, directing the defendant to be held to bail, be vacated j and that the Sheriff ' of Ontario be directed to deliver up the bail-bond, fee. This was an action for a libel; and the affidavit, on which the Judge made the order, set forth the libel, and stated, that seeurity for any damages to be recovered by the plaintiff, required that the defendant should be held to bail. The plaintiff now offered a supplementary affidavit, that the defendant was a young man, without family, having no visible property, except his printing press, fee.; and that he was informed, that the defendant intended to leave the state, fee.
   Per Curiam.

The cases of Clason v. Gould, (2 Caines’ Rep. 47.) and Van Vechten v. Hopkins, (2 Johns. Rep. 293.) fully decide, that the affidavit on which the Judge granted the order to hold to bail, is entirely defective. It follows, that the defendant has been improperly held to baib The affidavit now offered by the plaintiff cannot be received. According to the practice of the Court of K. B., in England, a supplemental affidavit, for the purpose of curing a defect in the original affidavit, is not admissible. (Molling v. Buckholtz, 2 Maule & Selwyn, 563.) If a default has been entered on an imperfect affidavit, it will be set aside, notwithstanding the facts might warrant the entry of a default. Besides, an affidavit made now, cannot retrospect, so as to authorize holding the defendant to bail, upon a defective affidavit. The motion must be granted.

Motion granted.  