The Sun.
London, England, 1827-05-25 00:00:00

so that each should be made to yield or prepared
to maintain his case, when as little delay and ex-
pence as possible has been occasioned. The
common counts give hardly any information of
the ground of action, taken singly ; but when all
put together, as they generally are, they still less
inform a defendant what he is called on to an-
swer. Special counts, in actions on the
case, give the most accurate information, per-
haps, of any ; and here, as the general issue
is the plea, the defence is as unknown to the
plaintiff as the cause of action in the common
counts is to the defendant. These are the two ex-
trcnies of ignorance in which the plaintiff and de-
fendant severally are kept ; but in almost every
intermediate case the information is far too im-
perfect. Thus an assault is always stated in
nearly the same form of words ; consequently,
the particular violence cannot be described with
any thing like accuracy. This, in almost every
case, time and place are immaterial, so that one
of the most important means of knowing what
your adversary refers to is excluded. Counts
for false imprisonment, criminal conversation,
seduction, &c. &c., have become as uniform and
consequently afford as little precise information ;
and yet these are supposed to be more special
than many others. Thus a count in trover
merely sets forth that the plaintiff lost the goods
and the defendant having found them converted
them to his use, but under this generality may be
concealed every manner of way in w-thich one man can
obtain possession ofanother's chattel without com-
mitting a crime in taking it. It seems quite evident,
that whatever opinion we may entertain upon
the possibility or expediency (if it be practicable)
of altering our English system in this respect,
when a new system is about to be found, great
care should be taken to render the disclosure
more full and precise, which the parties make to
each other of their respective cases, before com-
ing into Court to prove them by evidence. Two
reasons which immediately occur, are sufficient
to demonstrate this proposition. Much litiga-
tion, bootless or worse to the parties (whatever
it may be to the practitioners), will be pre-
vented, and much unnecessary expence in pre-
pasing for the trial will be saved. Mr. Broug-
ham has the following criticism on the Eng-
lish plea of general issue I think it con-
duces manifestly to the ends ofjustice, to allow the
plea of the general issue only when the defendant
intendsto rely exclusively upon a denial of the facts
alleged against him. He may, under such a plea,
give evidence of whatever directly disproves the
facts alleged, as Well as watch the proof of these
facts by the plaintiff ; but if he means to rely
upon other facts, as affording an answer to the
action, although the allegations of the plaintiff
be true, he ought to plead these specially, which
is the third kind of answer. Nothing can be less
satisfactory than our rules of pleading in this re-
spect, and the distinctions upon which they
proceeded. If I sue a man upon a simple con-
tract debt (as a bill or note, or implied promise
for goods sold to him) he may deny the promise
or undertaking generally,—and under that plea
he is allowed to admit the promise real or
implied,—to admit, for example, that he ac-
cepted the bill, or made the note, or bought the
goods,—but to give in evidence that he afterwards
paid what was due, or that he was an infant, and so
not liable on the bill or note at all, and on the sale
of goods, not unless for necessaries,—or that there
was no consideration,—or an illegal one, as a game
debt or usurious contract,—or that the plaintiff re-
leased the debt. It is plain, therefore, that this
general plea gives me no information as to the case
I must come prepared to meet, and that I may be
taken by surprise and defeated ; though, had I such
information, I might be able to defeat the defence."
But we cannot extend our extracts at present from a
document, every line of which supplies matter for
reflection. We cannot, however, close the subject,
without noticing the following suggestion thrown
out by Mr. Brougham, which appears to us deserving
of the most serious attention. After some observa-
tions on the importance of compelling a party to
show his documentary evidence to an adversary
before he is called on to answer, with a view to pre-
vent surprise at the trial, and stopping hopeless
actions and desperate defences, Mr. Brougham pro-
ceeds to say :—" The like effect will be produced
by the particularity required in stating the case of
each party—because this will show the weakness of
a case to the party himself, if it is a bad one—and
the strength of it to his adversary, if it be a good
one—much useless litigation will thus be prevented.
But I should not deal fairly with this most important
of All the questions I have been considering,
if I did mat add my conviction, that an exten-
sion of the superintending and discretionary func-
tions of the Judge, much beyond the scope of
the foregoing suggestions, would be by far the
most effectual check to bad litigation and pro-
fessional malversation, and the most powerful
aid to the due administration of justice. If, in the
earliest stage of each cause, there were a possibility
of bringing the parties themselves before a Judge,
or officer of respectability, who might hear them
state their mutual contentions, and the grounds of
them, might question them, and confer with them
upoe the whole matter, and give them his impres-
sion of the case, my firm belief is, that much more
than one-half the causes thus begun, never would
proceed one step further; and that a still greater
proportion of the causes now tried, would be aban-
doned or settled before they came into Court. The
appointment of =such arbitrators by public authority,
might have the most beneficial effects, even, if, at
least, it were not made compulsory to go before
them; for surely many parties would be found not
so entirely in the hands of these law agents, as to
prefer the course beneficial only to the profession."
We may here remark, that something like what Mr.
Brougham suggests here, has long been practised in
Denmark, and that the effects were found so bene-
ficial, that no "circumstance has more endeared the
memory of Count Bernstorf to the Danes than this
plan, of which he was the author. Parties in Den-
mark, before entering on litigation, appear in what
are called Courts of Reconciliation, and hear the
opinion of the Judges on the case, and if they choose
to abide by the suggestion of the Judge, a Decree
is entered; if not, they try their success at law.
We trust we shall have to congratulate our readers,
ere long, on :Nagy important improvements in our
judicature; that England, which in ep many other
respects is a model to the nations, may also have to
boast of the excellency of her laws;---11/orhing
Chronicle.

We are glad to see theAttcrney-General agree
with us in the opinion which we have often ex-
pressed with regard to the mischievous effects of
the present system of credit on the working
classes and others. This is a subject which we
have frequently brought before our readers, and
objecting as we do, to the cruel, absurd, and
unchristian practice of arrest for debt, we have
always contended that if the power of arrest were
taken away, it would have a great effect in cut-
ting up by the roots that facility of credit which
tempts so many people to live beyond their
means, and brings them to poverty and ruin.—
man may now be arrested and thrown into
prison for a debt of 10/. The Solicitor-General
obtained leave,, on Wednesday night, to bring
in a Bill prohibiting arrest in all cases of debt on
mesne process under 10/., and including debts
on Bills and Promissory Notes within the Act,
Which before 11.14 formed an exception ; so that
a man who had given a note for the smallest sum
eati be arrested upon it, as the law at this mo-