The Sun.
London, England, 1852-10-25 00:00:00

It might have been better had the parties been al

lowed to state their own cases in their own language.
We are aware of the high authority on which it was
considered that such a course would lead to useless
prolixity, end the introduction of unnecessary mat-
ter. We cannot, however, help 01Aing that a
plain and simple story briefly setting forth
the nature and chtracter of the acts complained
of, and an answer, either denying the facts
or explaining them, would ha far preferable to any
set forms, although the latter were free from all need-
less averments. The object of pleading is to enable

the presiding judge and the opposing party fully to
understand the case set up, and the points relied on ;
and it certainly appears that would be more fully ac-
complished, and the danger of "surprise" considerably
diminished, by the mode we have suggested. There
Was, however, apparently too great a dread of the
assimilation of the proceedings in Law and Equity,
and the fusion of the several tribunals—a reform that
must eventually be accomplished, to permit the adop-
tion of such a course.

We shall now briefly explain some of the provi-
sions of the Act, which it is essential should be gene-
rally known, although it would manifestly be im-
possible to enter into all its details within the space
allotted to a leading article in a public journal. The
writ of summons is, as heretofore, to be the first step
in every suit ; but it is no longer necessary to specify
the form or the cause of action therein, and it may be
served anywhere within the jurisdiction of court, in
place of being limited to the county or bailiwick for
which it was issued. Concurrent writs, too, may be
obtained for service within and without the juris-
diction, so that it will scarcely be possible for any
person whose locality is known to evade the service of
process, and thus set his creditors at defiance, while
he is certain of obtaining fall notice of the proceed-
ings that may be institated against him—a very
valuable improvement in every respect.
As we have already stated, writs of
.distringas are
totally abolished. It is only surprising how
object
owl ong
these absurd practices were tolerated.n The
for which they were sanctioned was that of enforc-
ing the appearance of a defendant,whocouldbunt whoot be
personally served with the w.:t of summons,
knew of the proceedings, and kept out of the way to
avoid service, under the system now happily abro-
gated. When the various calls bad been made, and
the judge satisfied of the bona-fide attempts to effect
personal service—in place of an appearance being at
once entered for tke defendant, the writ was issued,
under which they wero authorized to distrain on his
goods and chattels to the value of 40s. This dis-

tress, although utterly useless to the plaintiff, was
generally presented in the most stringent and vexa-
tious manner. It could not be sold, and, therefore,
it signified nothing whether what was token was of
the value of 403., or of a single farthing. The full
value was, however, invariably taken.
T
was bound to restore the article or articles seized, Sheriff'eized,on
an appearance being entered; but although this
was the law, still vexatious impediments were