Connecticut western news., 1878-12-18
Law RefOrmls

Any person, not learned in the law, who has heard the ~pleadings in 8 civil action read, has no doubt wondered why it was necessary to use so many words and so much repetition to state plain. simple facts, and if he has ever been so unfortunate as to get turned out Of Court, not because ht has made misstatement of the facts, but because he has mistaken the form of his action, his wonderment doubtless has gwen place to indignation. There is really nc necessity or good reason for this except that our forms of action and pleadings have come down to us from former generations. We confess that we are somewhat conserV- ative-perhaps old-fogyish-and look witt distrust upon those sweeping changes or re- forms which would brush away in an h. stant ss it were, the result of the experi- ence and wisdom of years and perhaps ol centuries. It is better sometimes to beaI the ills we have than fly to others we know not of. But when experience has demon strated that reforms and changes are neces- sary for the public good they should be et fected without hesitation. The last Legis- lature, we believe, took step in the right direction when they authorized the Govern or to appoint commission ito inquire iD- to the feasibility of simplifying our systen of legal procedure, by abolisning all unnec essary distinctions between forms of action, and otherwise securing more speedy ad mInistration of justice." Under this au- thority Governor Hubbard appointed tht ; following commission: Chief Justice Sey mour, Judge Lafayette s. Foster, Professor Baldwin of New Haven. State Attorney Hamersley of Hartford and Judge Brewster of Danbury- This IS very able commisslon in point of character, learning and experi- ence, and there are perhaps no two gentle men in the State whose judgment in mat ters of this kind would command greateE confidence and respect than the two Vener able judges whose names head the list. Tn; commission have prepared bill to be pre- sented to the next General Assembly, abol- ishing unnecessary distinctions between dit ferent forms of action and between pro- ceedings at law and proceedings in equity. We take the liberty of publishing the fol- lowing extract from their report:
 The various forms of civil actions are stiI retained by us, among which the suilo must at hls peril choose the right one, for mistake in the form of action may be tata, to the most righteous cause. We also stii. retain the old English practice of Cour of Equity, distinct from Court of law, both Ineeed, with us presided over by th, same Judge, but the one Court pursuing mode of practice wholly unlike the other and each adopting code of laws peculiar t. itself and unlike the code of the other. Tnt suit0r is often embarrassed with the irquir, to which of these Courts he shall resorL, and if be happens to find himself in the wrong Court. however just his cause may be, he is dismissed with costs, and obliged to begin again, after years, perhaps, ot la bor aHd expense spent in vain.
 Ia view oi these facts, it cannot with truth De sald that the means of access to our tribunals of justice are easy or plain. l. may be conceded that in a large mass ot the cases which occur in practice there is no serious difficu ty. We have become so familiar with our system that very Careful and learned lawyer will not often make a mistake. either in the appropriate action or the proper court, but the most careful and the most learned are sometimes in doubt, and the grounds upon which the choice of remedies depends are often so obscure and uncertain as to leave the highest skill at fault.
 Upon careful consideration of the matter, we have agreed to recommend two radical changes in our practice:
 1st. To abolish (with certain exceptions) the various forms ot civil actions, and allow the suiior to come info Court with simple complaint, stating in plain language his real grievance.
 2d. To permit the concurrent exercise of law and equity by one and ;he same Court in one and the same course of procedure
 The division of courts into those of law and equity is peculiarity of English juris- prudence, incidental to it's early develop ment, and not at all the result of deliber- ste approval of the separation as wise and necessary. No other European system Ot law retains such a distinction; and in 1873 it was abolished in Eugland itself.