Though we see much reason for the practice iu England in the point now before us, we cannot venture to innovate on the established usage of Pennsylvania, under which, the plaintiff’s counsel in ejectments have uniformly concluded. To alter this custom at Nisi Prius by one or two *304judges, would be highly inconvenient; for it might thus happen that the rules of practice might vary on the different circuits. ' Until therefore the present -mode of practice in a case circumstanced like the present, is reconsidered and altered in bank by the whole court, we must pursue the ancient system, which has never yet been broken in upon, either before or since the revolution. Motion denied.

A verdict passed for the plaintiff.