On  the  trial  of  the  is.sue,  plaintiff  proved  the
iviortgagc,  and  defendants  produced  no  evidence
wliatcver.    The  jury  found  for  defendants.
N<!il,  that  the  burden  of  proof  of  the  isstte
niisi'd  was  on  tlie  defendants,  and  that  as  they
hud  proved  nothing,  the  finding  must  be  set
aside.
.Uiirmy  v.  McDonald  et  id.,  R.  E.  D.,  142.
31.   Equity— Taking  out  rule  under  Statute

—Laches — Where  the  trial  took  place  in  Hali-
fiix  Ipcfore  the  Judge  in  K<iuity,  and  the  verdict
WHS  found  on  .September  'J")tli,  and  the  rule,
having  been  refused  by  the  Judge,  was  not  taken
out  until  October  .SOth,

Hdil,  that,  assuming  the  plaintiff  to  have
liiid  a  right  to  take  out  a  rule  under  tlie
Stiittite,  he  liad  allowed  too  nuich  time  to  elapse,
and  liad  by  the  delay  lost  his  right  to  do  so.
Eaton  V.  mialhcrlK.,  R.  E.  1).,  48.
32.   Equity -Trial  of  issues— Practice  on

setting  aside  verdicts  and  obtaining  new  trials
—The  practice  of  the  Supreme  Court  on  the
common  law  side,  in  relation  to  setting  aside
verdicts  and  granting  new  trials,  is  peculiarly
applicable  to  the  trials  of  issues  in  Kijuity,  on  cir-
cuit, ami  a  party  dissatisfied  with  a  verdict  in  an
Kcpiity  suit,  tried  on  circuit,  should  apply  to  the
Judge  before  whom  it  was  tried  for  a  rule  ?(;•<(,
or,  in  the  event  of  his  refusing  a  rule,  should
take  it  out  tinder  the  Statute,  and  cannot,
having  ignored  that  practice,  move  tlie  E(]uity
Court  at  Halifax  to  set  aside  the  verdict.
Chipman,  Executor,  v.  Garazn  tf  «/.,
R.  E.  D.,26.
33.  Evidence -Where  the  evidence  In  a

case  is  conflicting  and  contradictory,  and  two
verdicts  have  been  given  in  favor  of  the  same
party,  the  Court  will  not  disturb  the  verdict.
