Infants  are  liable,  like  adults,  for  their  tortious  acts,  and  an
infant  father  of  a  bastard  child  is  liable  for  its  support  as  though
he  were  adult.     Chandler  v.  Commonwealth,  4  Met.  68.
II.    OF  THE  PROTECTION  OF  THE  RIGHTS  AND  INTERESTS  OF  INFANTS.
1.  The  probable  sacrifice  of  the  interest  of  infants  will  not  be
grounds  for  making  a  distinction  in  their  favor,  where  none  is
made  by  the  statute.    Brace  v.  Shaw,  16  B.  Mon.  81.
2.  The  rights  and  interests  of  infants  are  under  the  special  care
of  courts  of  equity,  whose  duty  it  is  to  vacate  every  judgment  by
which  injustice  is  done  them.    Newland  v.  Gentry,  18  B.  Hon.  671.
III.   SUITS  BY  AND  AGAINST  INFANTS.
A.  By  infants.
B.  Against  infants.
C.  Service  of  process  against  infants.
a.  By  infants.
1.  Valid  grounds  for  vacating  a  judgment  against  infants  may  be
presented  as  well  before  as  after  their  arrival  at  full  age.  Newland
V.  Gentry,  18  B.  Mon.  671.
2.  "Whether  an  infant,  who  was  a  defendant  and  had  by  guardian
ad  litem  made  his  answer  a  cross-petition,  would,  in  a  suit  for  the
same  matter  against  the  same  person  after  his  majority,  be  barred
by  his  cross-petition.     Quere.    Enders  v.  Williams,  1  Met.  357.
h.  Suit  against  infants.
1.  An  infant  defendant,  coming  of  age  after  answer  by  a  guar-
dian ad  litem  but  before  decree,  may  answer  for  himself.     Mitchell
V.  Berry,  1  Met.  620.
300  INFANTS  AND  INPANCT.
2.  Before  judgment  can  be  rendered  against  an  infant,  charged
as  the  father  of  a  bastard  child,  a  guardian  ad  liteWu  must  be
appointed  to  defend  for  him.  Chandler  v.  Commonwealth,  4  Met.
70.
