AN ELEMENTARY VIEW OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN AN ACTION AT LAW. AN Action is the means pointed out by law of obtaining the remedy of a civil injury. It is defined by the Mirror to be the lawful demand of one's right, and by Bracton and Fleta to be jus persequendi in judicio id quod alicui debetur. The object of the present Treatise is to trace in a simple and intelligible manner the steps by which this "demand of one's right" is, according to the law of England, to be pursued. And it seems necessary, before entering on a description of those steps themselves, to describe the Tribunals before which they are to be taken. There are at present three Superior Courts of Common Law, the Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, all three of which alike derive B their origin from a court called the Curia Regis, or Aula Regis from the place in which it ordinarily was held, and which, under our early Norman princes, was the Supreme Court of Justice in this kingdom. Of this court the sovereign himself was the judge, assisted by the grand justiciary of England, who in his absence acted as his deputy, and by the other principal officers of state. The court was, however, not a stationary one. The monarch in those times frequently made the tour of his dominions: and one of his chief objects in doing so was to afford all his subjects the opportunity of applying to his court for justice. It is true that the whole business of the kingdom was not, and could not have been, there transacted. The labours of the Supreme Court were lightened by the Sheriff's County Court and tourn, and by the Leets and Courts Baron existing in the different manors throughout England. In these, many causes even of importance, and all petty causes, were decided; for it was thought beneath the dignity of the King's Court to take cognizance of any dispute the subject of which was of less value than 40s., a considerable sum in those days, and hence the practice which even now obtains in the superior courts, which represent the Aula Regis, of staying proceedings in an action, when it appears, from the plaintiff's own shewing, that his demand is less than 40s., and the cause is cognizable by an inferior court. However, though these local tribunals had, in many cases, a jurisdiction concurrent with that of the Aula Regis, still so much more confidence was reposed by the people at large in the wisdom and integrity of the supreme tribunal, which was seldom animated by those local prejudices, or actuated by those local interests which were too apt to sway the courts of the lord, or even of the sheriff, that in process of time means were found out of reserving almost every matter of importance for the decision of the Aula Regis, and parties were even willing to pay a sum of money to the crown for permission to sue there, which payments, as appears from the records of the Exchequer, constituted part of the royal revenue, and are the origin of the fines paid, at this day, upon all original writs issuing out of chancery. In consequence of the preference thus shewn by suitors for the Curia Regis, the business of that court became so heavy and frequently so much in arrear, that a numerous train of advocates and suitors were obliged to follow it about in its peregrinations from one end of the kingdom to the other. The inconveniences of this system, although diminished by the appointment of Justices in Eyre or in Itinere, whose courts were substituted for and represented that of the monarch himself in the districts through which they travelled, were so great, that they occasioned the insertion of a clause in Magna Charta," Communia placita non sequantur curiam nostram sed teneantur in aliquo loco certo." This clause, enjoining "that Common Pleas should no longer follow the King's Court, but be held in some fixed place," was complied with, by erecting the Court of Common Pleas at Westminster, and as the words "Common Pleas" so used in contradistinction to "Crown Pleas," included all disputes by which the interests of the crown were not affected, the consequence of this clause in Magna Charta was, that the proceedings in almost all civil actions, instead of being carried on wherever the Curia Regis happened to be, were transacted in the Court of Common Pleas at Westminster. This alteration took place in the reign of King John, and may be looked on as the origin of our present system of judicature. The establishment of the Common Pleas at Westminster while it removed one grievance created another, for, though the suitors had no longer to travel about after the King's Court, yet they had to come from the most distant parts of England up to Westminster. Accordingly, by the Statute of Westminster the Second, passed in the 13th year of the reign of Edward the First, the parties who, till that time, had been obliged to appear in person before the court (except in some cases of special favour) obtained the privilege of prosecuting and defending their suits by attorney; and thus it was that the employment of an attorney of the courts at Westminster originated. After the establishment of the Common Pleas at Westminster, the Curia Regis still continued to attend the king's person, and to decide causes in which the crown was concerned. But the great lawyers established themselves near Westminster, where they founded the Inns of Court, and devoted themselves to the more lucrative business transacted there. At length, Edward the First, by the advice of the most eminent lawyers of that day, determined to remodel the entire system of judicature. The Court of Common Pleas, indeed, he |