¶1(Dana, C. J., Sedgwick, and Thacher, justices) said that the motion was made in season, within the reasonable construction of the rule; and gave leave to plead double, as prayed for
¶2Swambly vs. Herby, vol. iv. 441, which must be considered as overruling the present so far as relates to this point. It is now settled that a grantor who has no interest, it competent to prove his deed fraudulent. Vol. xi. 498, Laker vs. Haynes.