¶1 The case of the state vs. Cross, does not apply. That case was a sci. fa. upon a forfeited recognisance, The defendant without craving oyer, or setting forth any part of the record, demurred, and shewed for cause, a variance between the recognisance, and sci. fa. the court determined as the defendant did not crave oyer, so as to point out the variance in his pleading, they were not authorised to look themselves for the variance, and upon that ground overruled the demurer.
¶2 In the case before the court oyer is craved, and the sci. fa. is set out in the demurrer, from which it appears, that the defendant ought to have been joined with her husband, and for this cause the demurrer was sustained.