date

22 April 1808 Reasons for the Work
22 April 1808

Reasons for the Work

Thus in simple suits which are the most common[?]: As to complex, a conception may be found of them[?] from[?] these[?] simple ones.

Thus it is that in a properly constructed system of pleading grounded on and adapted to a properly constructed body of substantive law, corresponding and framed with a view to its serving as a basis of reference, to such system of pleading there would be for each species of right but one body of allegations or instrument running to any length, viz. the instrument of demand, corresponding with the instrument called the declaration in the English system of procedure, and with the instrument called the libel as contained in and forming part of the instrument called the Summons in the Scottish system.

As to all ulterior instruments of allegation, the instrument of defence would in point of brevity and simplicity correspond, in all cases, to the instrument called in English procedure the Plea, in the cases where the allegation so made has the effect of any of the 5 or 6 most usual pleas called General Issues.

As to the instruments respectively called special pleas, replications, rejoinders, and so on, they need not nor therefore would they, any of them, have place.

{In the above deductions, in so far as they extend, are contained an indication of what a compleat body of substantive law ought to be, and a compleat system of pleading ought to be, the one being determined and explained by its relation to the other:- how to know concerning whether it be compleat: and if not, how to render it so.}

 Show why.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1 May 1808 J.B. to H of Commons]
    Description: 1 May 1808

    J.B. to H of Commons

    I. Reasons for the Work

    English pleading inapplicable to Scotland

    II. Defence

    18. The information furnished on the plaintiff's side being thus sparing of instruction, that which is furnished on the Defendant's side can not easily be more abundant. He who gives so little, and most of that little, false, has not much title to complain, though he should receive nothing in return.

    19. In general in 19 /49/ instances perhaps out of 20 /50/ after the first link in the chain of pleading, viz. the instrument of demand called the Declaration, the chain of pleadings has but one other, viz the instrument of defence, called the plea: and wherever this number is thus limited, the plea is said to be a general plea, and in pleading it the defendant is said to have pleaded the general issue: having pleaded that sort of plea, the effect of which is to bring the altercation to an issue ( exitus) i. e. to conclusion, earlier than any other would do.

    20. In contradistinction to the less usual sort of pleas, called special pleas, what the number is, of the pleas distinguished by the appellation general pleas, is a question to which no one has undertaken to give an answer.

    21. General pleas in frequent use - there are but four: 1. Not guilty: 2. Non-assumpsit. 3. Nil debit 4. Non est factum: among which four, the use of the two last is, again, unfrequent in comparison of the two others.

    22. In no one of all these instances does the sense put by lawyers upon the allegation on this occasion bear any tolerable resemblance to the sense that would be put upon the same expressions on any other occasion, by lawyers themselves any more than by any body else.
  • Title: [11 Feb y 1808 Homologation necessary]
    Description: 11 Feb y 1808

    Homologation necessary

    As The system of pleading at present in case under English law, constitutes a part of the regular that is the technical and dilatory system of procedure, to an English lawyer it would naturally seem of course that the application of any thing that could with propriety come under the denomination of a system of pleading would be attended as of necessity and of course with a mass of delay vexation and expence similar if not altogether equal to that which has place under that same technical system.

    But in truth a system of pleading, if properly constructed, and thence moulded upon: properly framed body of substantive law councils altogether as well with /is as compleatly adapted to/ the natural system of procedure as any system of pleading can possibly be to the technical. It stands in no degree dependent in any of those delays vexations and expences of which the technical system is composed.

    The parties being present in the face of each other and of the Judge, the /to enable the/ train[?] of pleading to have run out its length will require no greater length of time than to carry a suit for the same object through the forms of a Court of Natural Procedure such as are already on use - a /a Scotch/ Small debt Court or an English Court of Conscience.
  • Title: [28 April 1808 §.8. I. Reasons]
    Description: 28 April 1808

    §.8.

    I. Reasons for the Work

    §.8. No good pleading sans homologation

    §.8. No system of pleading either compleat, or, to the extent of it, well adapted to the ends of justice, can be constructed, unless its necessary basis, viz. the correspondent portion of substantive law, be in the state of statutory, in contradistinction to unwritten (say rather jurisprudential) law.

    1. By §.6. art. 1. the system of pleadings can not be subservient to its sole professed and sole proper purpose, any further than in its conformity to the correspondent portion of substantive law, the rule of action to which it professes to give execution and effect, is entire. But it is only by the hand of the legislator, that any such conformity can be produced. To produce it in any manner requires that the operator should at least have at his disposal the tenor of the instruments of which the system is composed. To produce it in the most convenient and perfect way requires that the operator be master not only of these instruments but of the portions of substantive law into which they are respectively to be made to fit: it requires that they should be worked up together: and not only that the instruments should be made to fit into the correspondent portion of substantive law, but that each portion of substantive law should be constructed in such a manner, put into such a form, as may fit it in the best manner to the purpose of housing those instruments moulded in it.