3rd  R.  S.,  C.  134,  s.  80-

"  Where  a  defendant  intends  to  set  npf-and  as
ft  defence  to  the  declaration,  or  a  plaintij)  to  rely
on  fraud  in  answer  to  a  plea  of  the  defendant,  it
must  he  jileailtd."

The  defendant  insisted  at  the  trial  upon  what,
if  true,  he  knew  before  the  trial,  and  when  he
pleaded  that  the  telescope,  to  recover  which
the  action  was  brought,  was  not  plaintiff 's,  he
should  have  gone  farther  and  alleged  that  she
claimed  property  in  it  under  a  gift  fraudulent
by  virtue  of  the  Statute.  Of  course  such  mat-
ter of  defence  could  not  be  entertained  without
violation  of  a  statutable  rule  of  pleading.
Clarke  v.  Fullerton,  2  N.  S.  D.,  348.
