date

[...?] May 1808 I. Reasons
[...?] May 1808

I. Reasons

Ch. I Pleadings its Objections

§.1. Proper purpose

Ch. I. Proper Objects and contents of a System of Pleading.

§. 1. To what purposes to which a system of pleading ought to be adapted.

1. By a System of pleading I understand an aggregate mass of instruments (a) of procedure, of which the immediate component parts are the several sets of pleadings delivered to each judicatory on the occasion of the several suits (b) or causes that, in the course of a given length of time, have been therein instituted.

2. By a

set of pleadings I understand a chain or string of written instruments successively delivered in to a judicial office; having for its component links, two at the least, viz., an instrument that may be called an instrument of demand delivered in on the plaintiff's side, an instrument that may be called an instrument of defence delivered in on the defendant's side: to which may be added other such alternating instruments in a number which has no absolutely certain limits: but which of late years has very seldom, if ever, extended beyond four.

(b) (Suits) Understand of such the[?] species of suits in which this mode of altercation is in use. For there are some in which it is not: all suits, for example, which are heard and determined vivâ voce: of the which class belong, individually taken, by far the greatest number.

(a) (Instruments) Though the species of altercation denoted by the term judicial pleading, in the English sense, is not incapable of being carried on vivâ voce, having, in the early ages of English jurisprudence, been actually carried on in that mode, yet in modern practice no such altercation being carried on otherwise than in writing, as often as, without special notice, the word pleading is hereinafter mentioned a written instrument is the object that will be understood as intended to be designated by it. In Scottish procedure the word has a more extensive and less determinate signification. See ch.│ │ §. │ │
Similar Items
  • Title: [Aug st 1808 + * A on L d Eldon]
    Description: Aug st 1808

    + * A

    on L d Eldon's Bill

    Homologation necessary

    Pleading requirement

    + N.B. By '. II Power is given to the Judges to make alterations & regulations concerning such forms of pleading and process, and particularly concerning the mode of conducting the pleadings in the said Division or Court, and before the Ordinaries, by Writing or by Pleadings caused (called?) or vivâ voce.

    But in the authorities given to the Commrs, the word proceeding is dropt: nothing said of Pleadings

    An essential, indispensable part - a part without which every other must remain a chaos - is a system of pleading: and on this head there is not a syllable

    A system of pleading is that part of the system of procedure which in Scotch law /practice/ is in a coarse and more imperfect state than any other. In English practice, bas as it is, it is not nearly so bad. Though in a superior degree it answers /fulfills/ the ends /purposes/ for which it was contrived, the purposes of judicature, yet to a certain degree, compared with the Scottish chaos, even to a considerable degree. Here it means the purposes of justice.
  • Title: [[094-273v] 27 May 1806 Evidence]
    Description: [094-273v]

    27 May 1806

    Evidence

    Exclusion II. Proper

    Ch. Engl. Law & Vexation

    '. to Judges

    4. Roman /Rome bred/ mode per judicam ad hoc solum. /The/ [...?], whether extraneous witnesses examined vivâ voce by the Judge alone: if a party no other party present: if no extraneous witness no party present: no person present in quality of assistant to either party: no interrogatory consequently no counter-interrogatory by any person but the Judge. Interrogations proposed before hand and in writing: testimony delivered vivâ voce but, consigned to writing upon the spot. Employed under Roman Law every where out of the English School, and in the English School within a certain number of scribes[?] of the metropolis, under the direction of the Courts of Equity.

    + The decision not formed by the Judge by whom the evidence is thus collected.

    5. Romano-Anglican mode by Commissioners /on both sides/. The same as above, except that the Commissioners, being nominated in equal number on each side, unite in some measure the character of representatives of the parties to that of Judges.

    6. Romano Anglican mode before a Master /(a sort of subordinate Judge) in Equity and at Common Law/. The same as in N o 4 except that the decision is framed by the same Judge by whom the evidence is collected. Examination sometimes upon Written interrogations, prepared on behalf of parties, sometimes without any such help or dep.[?]

    7. English Affidavit made upon oath. Testimony delivered in writing: neither counter-interrogation nor interrogation, by Judge, party or any body else. /Evidence/ Received indiscriminately in this shape from parties on both sides, and from extraneous witnesses

    8. Affidavit mode without oath /Assertion uninterrogated and unsworn/, or special pleading mode. The same as N o │ │ except as to the absence /non-existence/ of the ceremony of the oath, and thence of punishment, in case of mendacity, vis for perjury. For the occasion In which this form is employed, see the ensuing Chapter on the Mendacity-licence. In the Roman School, (in the French class of it at least) in all cases, except where the Roman mode N o 4 is employed: /employed/ in use on all interlocutory, or say incidental, applications. In the English School, in use in such alleviations alone, as are included under the name of Pleadings. See the Chapter so intituled.
  • Title: [18 June 1805 Evidence Introd]
    Description: 18 June 1805

    Evidence

    Introd

    Ch. Procedure Technical

    ''.7. Writing abuse

    In /To/ /Without/ the abuse of writing we have /may be seen/ the means of bringing about three /essential/ /the suitor could never have been burthened with that prodigious load of expence vexation and delay of which the exhibition of/ instruments of mutual altercation succeeding one another at intervals more or less distinct, in the particular /immediate/ efficient cause. Where an allegation /a mass of allegations/ is committed to writing, and each party is under an obligation or at liberty to answer the mass of allegations exhibited by the other, an interval of time between the exhibition of one such instrument, and the exhibition of another such instrument can not be refused. It could not, even were hired assistants out of the question: much more where the necessity of employing assistants of that description, especially if of different classes /ranks/, one believed another, has been contrived to be created. Under the system, of which vivâ voce examination as well of parties in the presence of each other as of witnesses (extraneous witnesses wherever present) forms an essential /a distinctive/ feature, all such altercations would naturally, and, saving accidental ignorance or oversights, necessarily, come out at once; come out at the first meeting.

    Before this abuse of writing, whatever allegations, relevant or irrelevant, true or false, came out in the course of the cause, must have been exhibited, by the parties, or, in the accidental case of inability to attend, by their gratuitous proxies: for the assistance /interference/ /agency/ of professional and hired agents /assistants/, not even in the character of assistants, much less in the character of proxies, could there have been any real need felt, or plausible appearance of necessity created. In the presence of the party, even where he is unfortunate enough to be obliged to purchase the treacherous service of a [...?] assistant, the art of making business can never be carried to any extent, approaching to that to which it is carried of course, when that check to professional treachery is removed.