ond or new return of a matter to the referee (auditor, master, etc.) for an additional or amended report. When a case is referred, not by a submission in pais, but by a rule of court, the referee derives his authority from the court, not from the consent of the parties. The case remains in court subject to its power, and a judgment must be entered by the court. The procedure is a substitute for a trial by jury.¹ the other, by compelling the delinquent party to perform his undertaking according to its terms and the manifest intention of the parties. At the same time, equity has no power to make agreements for parties.1 See JOINT. The burden of overcoming the strong presumption arising from the terms of a written instrument rests upon the moving party. If the proofs are doubtful and unsatisfactory, if there is a failure to overcome this presumption by testimony entirely plain and conSee ARBITRATION; AUDIT; AWARD, 2; FINDING, Spevincing beyond reasonable controversy, the writing cial; MASTER, 4; REPORT, 1 (1). 2. A reference in one instrument to another incorporates the latter. See further VERBUM, Verba illata, etc. To "refresh the memory" means to consult letters, diaries, or other memoranda in order to be enabled to recall the details of a past event. After that, the witness is regarded as speaking from memory. A witness may refresh with memoranda not in themselves admissible. He need not remember the 1 Hunt v. Rousmaniere, 1 Pet. *13-14 (1828), Washington, J.; Same v. Same, 8 Wheat. 211 (1823); Walden v. Skinner, 101 U. S. 583 (1879); 1 Story, Eq. §§ 151-80; 2 Pomeroy, Eq. §§ 845-71. 2 Howland v. Blake, 97 U. S. 626 (1878), cases, Hunt, J.; Maxwell Land-Grant Case, 121 id. 381 (1887), cases; 4 Cliff. 582; 76 N. Y. 458; 1 Story, Eq. § 152. 3 Snell v. Atlantic Fire & Mar. Ins. Co., 98 U. S. 89-90 (1878), cases, Harlan, J. See also Elliott v. Sackett, 108 id. 142 (1882); Leaver v. Dennett, 109 id, 90 (1883); Baltzer v. Raleigh, &c. R. Co., 115 id. 645 (1885), cases; Coyle v. Davis, 116 id. 108 (1885); Reed v. Root, 59 Iowa, 359 (1882); Fessenden v. Ockington, 74 Me. 125 (1882), cases; Clark v. Higgins, 132 Mass. 589-90 (1882), cases. Palmer v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 54 Conn. 501-9 (1886), cases. * [Hughes v. Daly, 49 Conn. 34 (1882), Pardee, J.