The Sun.
London, England, 1829-03-16 00:00:00

others ?

4. Supposing the plaintiff to insert several counts
on the same cause of action, might the second and
subsequent counts be so framed as to refer to the
first, and point out the variations only ? Or would
such reference, in your opinion, render the plead-
ings complicated and obscure ? And would it be
better that each count should be complete in itself,
pointing out, however, by the words of its com-
mencement or otherwise, whether it be a different
statement of the same cause of action, or a
statement of a different cause of action, by which
means the defendant would know how to treat them
in his pleas ?
5. Do you think that the defendant should be con-
fined to one plea, or any fixed number of pleas to
each count or set of counts, upon the same cause of
action ? Or should he be at liberty to plead as many
distinct defences as he thinks fit, at the peril of pay-
ing the costs of all on which he does not succeed, al-
though he should succeed on one which goes to the
whole cause of action, and should also be at liberty to
plead as many pleas containing the same matter of
defence, differently stated, as he thinks fit, the de-
fendant being entitled to the costs of the pleadings
on one plea only, though all be proved, and paying
or not receiving the costs of the pleadings on the
others ?

6. Supposing the defendant to be allowed to plead
several pleas at the peril of costs as above suggested,
is there any use in their being signed by counsel, or
in requiring the leave of the Court—regard being
had to the difficulty which must exist in the Court
or a Judge exercising a discretion on the subject?
7. Do you think that the plaintiff ought to be al-
lowed to make several replications to each plea, or
not ? If you think that he ought, in what cases
should he be allowed a general replication ? If you
think that he ought, should the defendant make se-
veral rejoinders ? And in the same mariner as to
subsequent pleadings—if either is to Ise restrained,
is the plaintiff or the defendant to be first restrained?
8. Do you think that the making of profert
might be beneficially extended to all written instru-
ments, accompanied with such regulations as might
prevent the necessity of setting out the whole of
the instrument upon oyer ? And that no proof
should, in any form of action, be required of in-
struments of which profert is made, unless they
are specially denied ?
9. Would it, in your judgment, be proper that
the costs of the trial of every issue should be paid
by the party failing on that issue, whatever be the
general result of the cause ? Would such regula-
tion tend to check prolixity in pleading and the
taking of unnecessary issues ? Would it be produc-
tive of any considerable inconvenience by rendering
it necessary to try all the issues in a cause on ac-
count of the costs, though the trial of one issue
may decide the merits? If, of any, do you not
think that the benefit would outweigh the conve-
nience ?
10. Where time, place, quantity, price, or value,
need not be proved as laid, might they not be
omitted in pleadings altogether ?
11. In debt and indebitatus assumpsit, might not
one count, consisting of several articles, be in all
cases sufficient ? lii other actions or contracts,
would it be possible, without introducing much un-
certainty, to allow the plaintiffs to recover on prov-
ing part of the consideration, or part of the thing
contracted to be done, proVided that which was
proved would be sufficient in itself to sustain the
action ?
12. In your opinion, is it not desirable that the
forms of action should be kept distinct as they now
are ? Or do you think it desirable that counts in
different forms of action should be joined in the
same declaration : as, for instance, trespass, arid
trespass on the case, and many others ?
13. In our opinion, might the general issue in
assumpsit, debt, and trespass on the case, be ad-
vantageously discontinued, and the defendant be
compelled to deny specifically any averment he dis-
putes, and to plead specially all matters which form
a defence in law, as illegality in the contract, in-
fancy, coverture, &c. ?
14. In debt on simple contract, and indebitatus
assumpsit, in which the declaration is general, and
therefore the defendant cannot deny any specific
averment of fact alone (for it is obvious that a denial
of being indebted might frequently involve matter
of law), might not the plea be, " that lie denies
the matter of fact, whereby the said debt is sup-
posed to accrue ?" And if there be any defence in
law, as illegality, infancy, coverture, should it not
be specially pleaded ?
15. Wherever particulars of the deniand might be
given, should they not be delivered as of course at
the time of declaring ? And should not the same
rule apply to pleas of set-off ? And would it be ad-
vantageous, where the set-off exceeds the demand,
to allow the defendant to recover the balance, if he
gives notice of his intention to do so ?
16. In your opinion, should the non-joinder of a
contractor be the subject of a plea in abatement un-
der the present restrictions, which treat such plea as
a dilatory one ? Or should such plea be treated as a
fair plea in bar, and pleaded in the same time and
without affidavit,—with this restriction, that it
should not be allowed at all, unless the defendant at
the time of pleading procures an appearance to be
entered for the parties, who he insists ought to be
joined ? And in what case would it be right that
the plaintiff should be at liberty to amend his decla-
ration, by inserting the other names, but still be
permitted to take judgment against the original de-
fendant, if lie proves his case against him, but fails
against the added defendants ?
17. In general do you think that it would be ad.
vantageous that the plaintiff should not be nonsuited
for joining too many defendants in contract as well
tort, but should pay costs in all forms of action
to any defendant against whom he fails ? And what
in your opinion should be the consequence of join-
ing too many plaintiffs, as well in actions of contract
as of tort ?
Is. Do you think it would be convenient that
the payment of money into court should be stated
on the record ? Do you think that the power of
the person
paying money into court should be extended to all
cases to all except to actions for
injuries' to
or reputation, or any and
what t h orr, s if
? not
An to all,
w
would it be advantageous, in
order to lessen the expense in proving damages, to
allow the defendant in those cases in which lie might

have paid money into court to annex to his plea,
whatever it may be, an offer that the damages, if
any be recoverable, should be taken at a given sum,
which offer the plaintiff may accept or not; if ac-
cepted then, that the offer and acceptance should be
annexed to the record, and should be conclusive as to
the result of the verdict ; if not accepted then, that it
should not be annexed to the record, as stated to the
jury, but be
.produced to the proper officer upon
taxation of costs, who should allow the costs of
proving the damages to either party, according as the
jury find more or less than the sum offered ?
19. Would it not be desirable that actions of re-
plevin should be brought in the superior courts in
the first instance, the mode of proceeding in replevy-
ing remaining as at present? Have you any amend-
ment to propose with respect to proceedings in pro-
hibition ? Might not the suggestion be dispensed
with, and the affidavit in support of the motion be
sufficient ? Do you think that debt should be for an
annuity of freehold, instead of a writ of annuity ;
and do any other alterations in the forms of actions
appear to you advisable ?
20. In what cases do you think the venue should
be local ? and in transitory actions how and under
what circumstances should the defendant be at li-
berty to change the venue ? Does it appear to you
that any and what alteration is required in the pre-
sent law and practice relative to change of venue ?
21. Is there any use in retaining the present form
of protestation, if a provision is made that the par-
ties shall no longer be concluded in a subsequent
action as to facts averred and not traversed in a
former 'action ?
22. Would it not be desirable in actions of tres-
pass to allow a defendant to justify under rights of
way, &c., alleging possession only of the property in
respect of which the right is claimed ? and in re-
plevin would it be desirable to allow a similar form
of avowry as to fee-farm rents and rent-charges, as
is given by 11th Geo. 11., cap. 19, respecting rents
within that statute ? Would it be desirable, ►n ac-
tions of covenant, to allow a plaintiff to state gene-
rally an assignment of the reversion to himself ?--
And, generally, wherever derivative title is alleged,
that. the party should not be bound to deduce it step
by step on the record, such deduction not forming
in general any part of the merit of the case ?
23. In cases where it appears that there are mu-
tual accounts between the parties in a cause consist-
ing of several issues on each side, would it be de-
sirable that the judge who tries the cause should
have power to order the matter of account to be re-
ferred to arbitration, subject to any and what regu-
lations, and giving the parties greater facilities of
revising the decision than they now have in cases of
arbitrators chosen by themselves ? Are you of opi-
nion that such power might be safely and benefici-
ally given to the Court upon motion, at any and
what stage of the proceedings prior to the trial, and
under what circumstances ? Would it not he desi-
rable, in order to render proceedings by reference in
this and other cases more effectual, to give to arbi-
trators, under a submission by rule, an order of
court, or judge's order, the power of compelling the
attendance of witnesses, and of examining witnesses
abroad ?
24. To prevent false or vexatious pleading; would
it be desirable that the plaintiff should be ent►tled, at
his own costs, to call on the defendant to verify his
plea by affidavit, stating that he believes the plea
to be true, the defendant being at liberty to apply
to a judge for leave, under special circumstances, to
retain his plea without such affidavit, as, for instance,
where a verdict may be necessary for the defendant's
indemnity in an action against a third person ?
Should there be any distinction between negative
and affirmative pleas ?
25. To prevent sham demurrers, would it be de-
sirable that no demurrer should be received without
a certificate of counsel, that he is of opinion there is
reasonable ground of demurrer ?
26. In cases where bills of interpleader are now
allowed by courts of equity, would it, in your opi-
nion, be desirable to give the court in which the
action is pending a power to make such order as
may be just for the purpose, instead of the parties
being compelled to go into a court of equity ? In
what way would you recommend this to be carried
into effect ?
27. Would it not be desirable, in order to obtain
the benefit of a discovery, that the parties in a cause
should be examined upon oath, either personally, or
by interrogatories ? At what stage of the proceed-
ings should this be done, and before whom, and
what regulations would you suggest for the purpose
of carrying this measure into effect ?
28. Would there be any inconvenience in giving a
Court of Law power, without the consent of par-
ties, to issue a commission for examining witnesses
who are abroad, or going abroad, or unable to travel
or in prison ?
29. Will there be any inconvenience, in your
opinion, in allowing one party to give notice to the
other of his intention to offer in evidence any writ-
ten document specifying the same, and appointing a
time and place for the inspection thereof, and in
case such document should not be admitted, the
costs of proving the same, if proved, should be paid
by the party refusing to admit the same, whatever
be the result of the cause ?
30. IN your opinion, might the present forms of
real actions, with any and what exceptions, be safely
and advantageously abolished, and the action of
ejectment newly modelled, so as to enable a plaintiff
to recover either the seizure or the possession of the
property claimed according to the circumstances of
the case, and so that the real claimantl should be
plaintiff, claiming title under different persons, as the
nominal plaintiff now does, but without the fictions
of lease, entry, and ouster ? Should the plaintiff in
such actions be obliged to state his title specially in
the declaration, and the defendant to plead specially
to the same or not ? Do you think that any and
what inconveniences would arise from such special
form of pleading as rpplied t• an action of eject-
ment ? Does any and what amendment occur to
you with respect to the pleadings and proceedings
, in quare impedit and dower ?

The Rev. John Wordsworth, son of W.
Wordsworth, Esq. of Rydal Mount, (the poet) has been
presented by the Earl of Lonsdale, to the Rectory of Mores,
by, near Whitehaven.
MR. O'CoNNELL.—We are happy to see
that the measure of giving to this patriotic man some solid
testimony of national gratitude, has not evaporated in the
mere desire expressed in every liberal society for some time
past, or in newspaper paragraphs, echoing that desire.
The work has been commenced. That excellent citizen
and steady patriot, Cornelius Macloghlin, has put down
his name for 5001., and we trust and believe, that before
three months, there is not a man, woman, or child, of
seven millions of people, but will he able to claim the
honour of having contributed something to a fund worthy
of the nation, and of the illustrious individual who has
been the main instrument of obtaining the great and blood-
less victory of justice.—Dublin Morning Register.

The vacancy of Foreign Associate of the Paris
Academy of Sciences occasioned by the death of Dr. Wol-
laston, has not yet been filled up. At the last sitting of
the Academy, the President, after a warm eulogium on
the merits of the deceased member, ordered that a com-
mission should be formed, for the purpose of presenting to
the Academy the names of the distinguished persons from
amongst whoria it is intended to fill up the vacancy.—
Literary Gazette.

It is a very general opinion amongst the
persons best acquainted with the manufacturing and com-
mercial interests of this country, that the speedy settle-
ment of the Catholic Question will tend greatly to the re-
vival of trade in this country—particularly the trade with
Ireland, Which the unsettled state of that question has part-
lyzed beyond all former example.—Leeds Mercury.

CITY CALENDAR.—Conspiracy to kill, one ;
rape, one; assault with intent to kill, one; robbery,
seven ; highway robbery, two—Total, twelve.—Dublin
Morning Ilegister.

I The improved prospects for Ireland are al-
ready beginning to be appreciated by the natives resident
in Glasgow. Within these few days, 200 Irish families
in the weaving line have left Bridgeton, and embarked for
their native country, and more are preparing to follow.—
Scotsman.