Mountain Democrat. [volume] (Placerville, El Dorado Co., Cal.) 1854-1860, 1860-01-28
M. WGlty's Bill.

1
Act in several important particulars, has found
its way to our drawer. While it isimpOrtant
that the Practice Act should be made as per.
feet and complete, in oil Its parts. as human
laws can be, the Legislature should not forget
that changes are not always improvements
and frequently lead to the very evils against
which. it is presumed, tLey are intended to
guard. Most Of the provisions Of the Practice
Act have been construed by the Supreme
Court, and whatever there was in them OF
doubtful meaning and import, has been clear
ly defined and brought forth from the mSts
Of doubt and uncertainty. These provisions
Of the Act, it would, in our judgment, be cx-
tremely unwise, in the Legislature, to disturb,
since amendments might be followed BY IN.
eertainties, unsettling that which has been
settled, and making it necessary to invoke, 4
sscoad time, the construction Of the Courts,
at the expense and to the prejudice Of parties
litigaMt With this rule kept studiously in
view, however, there is no objection to amend.
meats which, after careful consideration, are
found to be improvements as we'll as amend
nents, and calculated to afford more speedy
and satisfactory administration Of justice.
It is not our purpose to notice all the
amendments proposed in Mr.. Welty's Bill
So Car as they effect the practice Of the Courts
merely We shall not presume to express opin
ions or pass judgment upon them, since ours
are not the " microscopic eyes" Of a lawyer,
and they might fail to detect slight defects
which might be patent to the glance profrs
sional. There are, however, Sotne changes
proposed in the bill under consideration,
whose merits and demerits are not hidden 10
the "eye editorial, and such, and such only,
We purpose to notice.
The amendments proposed to sections %
and % arc Objectionable, and, in our judg.
ment, unwise. The only object sought to be
accomplished by these two amendments, so
far as our uneducated eyes can discover, is an
iHdfTectextenSiono fthe statute off1tmitGti0ns.
IInder the Law, as it now stands, an action is
commenced BY filing Complaint and issuing
Summons thereon. The filing Of the Com.
plant amounts to nothing exccptit be accom-.
panied BY the act Of issuing Summons.
Under the. proposed amendments a party
may file his Complaint and wait year before
he issues his Summons. This accomplishes
land can accomplish nothing MORE an exten
sion Of the Statute Of Limitations for one year
If it is desirable that the Statute OF Limitations
should be extended at all, why, we ask, is i
desirable to extend it in this secret and indi
rect manncr?-A manner, to say the least
calculated to miSlead and entrap unproiession
al members into a change of law which
knowingly, they might not be disposed to in
terfere with. II it is proper or expedcnt, il
the judgment Of the Legislature, to amend tn
Statute Of Limitations, and extend the tim
within which certain or all actions may b
brought, let such amendment DO proposes
openly to the Statute of Limitations Itself
then members will DO fully and fairly advise,
of the object sought and can act understand
ingly in the premises Besides, such an amend
ment has no business in the Practice Act
its proper place is in the Statute Of Limitations
where the unprofcssional. as we'll as the pro
fessional man, would naturally look for it,
We are not disposed to be suspicious, bu
this looks to Us very much like an attemp; t
accomplish indirectly what it was believed
could not be consummated by direct action
However much We may admire labyrinthla
windings and turnings in pleasure ground
and landscapes in matters of Legislation "
much prefer short and straight lines and path
leading directly and openly to the point sough
to be attained Hogarth's curved line Of beau
ty and grace is very fine in its proper place
but it never was intended as path for legslA
ton to walk in. In addition, we arc opposes
to any extension Of the Statute ofLimitations
Experience has shown the wisdom Of limiting
the time within which actions can be brought
Tho necessity and cxpediency Of such limita
tons are too obvious to require comment
The speedy adjustment of titles, either b,
litigation, or operation Of law, is Of vital i'm
portance to the growth and prosperity Of
young State, and this can only be accomplishe,
by the Statute Of Limitations which spurs Of
the tSrdy to more speedy action in the prem
Uses, or gives quietus to his claims and sc
curity and enjoyment to his adversary.
The amendments proposed to sections 81
90, and % are not needed and had better no
be made, at least so say our friends Of the lega
profession, to whose judgment, in matter o
practice merely, We are disposed to yield.
The amendment proposed TO section SO is
In our judgment, much needed. Az the Law
now stands the Plaintiff has an undue advan
tage over the Defendant In the matter Of plead
ings-since he can appeal to the conscience o
the Defendant and force him TO admit or deny
the facts stated in the Complaint under oath
while the Defendant, If compelled to rely
upon new matter for his defence, has nj
means Of exacting from the Plaintiff an admis
sion Of the truth of such new matter, but tn
same stands as denied By the Plaintiff, wheth
er true or not, and the Defendant, while h
admits the facts stated by the Plaintiff is on
erousIy compelled to prove those stated BY
himself, notwithstanding the Plaintiff nigh
admit the truth of them If there was any
means of compelling him to do so. This, Al
every one can perceive, operates harshly Al
against the Defendant and should be remcdied
This can only be done In the manner proposed