Opinion of the Court by
Justice Lockwood.
The only question submitted in this case is, whether the court ought to have suffered the amendment asked for. The mistake committed in the scire facias is clearly a clerical error, and upon the principle assumed by late cases, that the court will amend all such errors, the court below ought to have permitted it. The mistake in this case could not lead to any misapprehension or in the least tend to surprise the party. The doctrine of amendments is well calculated to advance justice and prevent delay. The constitution requiring that writs, &c., shall run “in the name of the people of the state of Illinois,” seems to be directory to the clerk or person issuing the process, and the omission of the words is a mere misprision of the clerk and ought not to work an injury to the plaintiffs. The court therefore erred in dismissing the scire facias and entering judgment against plaintiffs for the costs. The judgment is reversed with costs, and the cause remanded to the circuit court of Madison, for further proceedings,
Cowles, states’ attorney, for plaintiff in error.
J. Reynolds, for defendant in error.
Judgment reversed.
Article 4, section 7.
Generally, all amendments are within the discretion of the court, and are allowed in furtherance of justice, under the particular circumstances of the case. 6 Dane’s Dig., 280. A writ amended by adding the clerk’s name on paying costs. Id., 295.
A ca. sa. on which the defendant had been taken was allowed to be amended by adding the testatum clause. 3 Johns. Rep., 144. 5 Johns. Rep., 163. 2 Term. Rep., 737. 5 Johns. Rep , 100. 1 Johns. Cas., 31. 3 Johns. Rep., 443.
Amendments are reducible to no certain rule. Each particular case must be left to the sound discretion of the court. The best principle seems to be that an amendment shall or shall not be permitted, as it will best tend to the furtherance of justice. 1 Bin., 369. Clerical errors may be amended in a criminal as well as in a civii case. 2 Bin., 514. Mistakes and misprisions of the clerk may be amended at any time. Hanley v. Dewes, Miss. Rep., 17. Vide, 2 Tidd’s Prac., 1036. 2 Bos. & Pull., 275. 9 Johns. Rep., 386. 1 Bos. & Pull., 31, 137, 329. 5 id., 103.