
    Wisner and others vs. Wilcocks and others.
    
      EjeBment. /~\GILVIE moved that Amos WiU ^ cocks be admitted to defend jointly, on his affidavit that the defendants hold of him as their landlord.
    
      Riggs for plaintiff' oppofed the granting a rule, becaufe the affidavit did not fpecify that Amos Wilcocks was in the receipt of rent.
    
   Per Curiam.

There is no cafe which goes the length of faying that none are to be confidered as landlords within the meaning of this rule, but thofe who a&ually receive rents. Some dieta look that way, but it is the privity of intereft, and not the receiving of rent, which is the true teft, A mortgagee out of poffeffion may be let in to dcfencL Strangers only are to be excluded.

Vide 3 Burr. 1292 to 1304. Comb. 209. Runnington on Ejectment, 72. Butter 95.

Motion granted.  