0 C. CAVANAGH, B.A., LL.B. (LOND.), OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE AND NORTHERN CIRCUIT, BARRISTER-AT-LAW, LONDON: WATERLOW AND SONS LIMITED, LONDON WALL, E.C. 1887. 11-20-48- Sweet and faxwell PREFACE. A MONGST recent legal reforms none have proved more useful and none have been hailed with more genuine satisfaction than such as have tended to expedite the administration of justice. Of these reforms that which has most materially contributed to lessen the law's delay is the system of obtaining summary judgment -originally introduced by the Rules of Court, 1875, and subsequently confirmed and extended by the Rules of Court, 1883. At the time when the former of these sets of rules came into force, there were in general but two classes of cases in which final judgment for a money claim could have been obtained without going through all the regular stages of an action. In one class final judgment might have been signed by default of appearance to a writ specially indorsed under the Common Law Procedure Act, 1852; in the other class final judgment might have been signed by default of appearance to a writ issued under the Summary Procedure on Bills of Exchange Act, 1855. To a writ specially indorsed under the Act of 1852, Defendant had a right to appear at any time within eight days after service thereof; to a writ issued under the Act of 1855, Defendant had no right to 673636 |