CHAP. VI. PROCEEDINGS

ON EXECU

TIONS, &c.

tisfaction.

When the sum recovered has been paid or satisfied, the defendant may and ought immediately to require and compel the plaintiff to cause an acknowledgment of satisfaction to be entered on the roll, so as to prevent future annoyance, and to 4. Entry of sasatisfy any proposed purchaser of the estates of the defendant that they are not subject to any execution or judgment. (n) In Blanchard v. Cawthorne, before the Vice-Chancellor, in A. D. 1831, where it was doubtful whether a bond debt and judgment thereon had been satisfied by payment made by a coobligor, or by the party himself, the Vice-Chancellor said he must assume that if the debt had been satisfied, the defendant would have applied to have satisfaction entered, or to stop the execution issued upon the judgment, and that the fact of the judgment remaining on the record, without satisfaction entered, was an answer to what was said about its being possibly paid. From this decision it may be collected that in Equity the very circumstance of satisfaction not appearing on the roll to have been satisfied by the usual entry to that effect, will be considered as proof that it remains in force. In a late case it was held that where a judgment has been satisfied, and the plaintiff is out of the country, so that the usual warrant to enter up satisfaction on the roll cannot be obtained, the defendant must clearly establish by affidavit that the judgment has been satisfied, before the Court will order satisfaction to be entered. (0)

in the

faction.

The following is the usual form of the entry of satisfaction:Afterwards, to wit, on year of the reign of the Lady the The form of Queen, before the said Lady the Queen, at Westminster, comes, [or in C. P. entry of satisor Exch. "afterwards, to wit, on in the year of the reign of the Lady the Queen, comes here,"] the said A. B. by his attorney aforesaid, [or "by P. A. his attorney in this behalf,"] and acknowledgeth himself to be satisfied by the said C. D. of the damages, costs and charges aforesaid, [or in debt "of the debt and damages aforesaid,"] therefore let the said C. D. be thereof acquitted. (p)

(1) Tidd, 9th edit. 1041; 1 T. Chitty's Arch. K. B. 5th edit. 530 to 534, where see the practical proceedings fully stated. (0) De Bastos v. Willmott, 1 Hodge's

Rep. C. P. 15.

(p) Tidd, 9th edit. 1041; 1 Chit. Ar. Pr. 508.

FORMS.

PRACTICE IN

tory observa

THE bill brought in by the Lord Chancellor on the 12th of CHAP. VII. February, A. D. 1836, relative to abolishing contentious eccle- ECCLESIASTICAL siastical jurisdiction, and the forming of a Court, to be called COURTS. "His Majesty's Court of Probate," contemplated several im- General prefaportant alterations in the Courts as at present constituted. tions. Many of the suits now cognizable in the Ecclesiastical Courts would, by the proposed measure, have been removed into the Courts of common law, or become a matter for magisterial investigation; it is therefore obvious that the form of pleading or statement hitherto adopted and recognized in the Ecclesiastical Courts may be exceedingly servicable to the profession in general; and this, whether or not the Courts remain as at present established, or whether the bill then before the House of Lords shall hereafter become the law of the land.

It is evident, that in all cases of litigation the professional adviser should be acquainted not only with the mode of conducting a suit, but also with the facts necessary to be pleaded or stated and supported by evidence; and the cause of a client is frequently endangered from want of knowledge in this respect,

PRACTICE IN ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.

CHAP. VII. and this is particularly apparent in regard to suits in the Ecclesiastical Courts, the practitioners or proctors there being generally engaged by solicitors, to whom they usually look to furnish them with every requisite information and material for conducting the cause; as so much depends upon the solicitor in regard to possessing himself sufficiently of the facts of the case, the seeking of evidence, and what evidence is necessary, it follows, that if he be wholly unacquainted with the forms of proceeding and pleading, and ignorant of what testimony is requisite to support his client's case, the cause of such client is very likely to be placed in jeopardy, if not totally defeated. To remedy this inconvenience, it is proposed in the following pages to state the existing practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts, and to subjoin several forms now used in the Ecclesiastical suits; whereby the practitioner will be enabled to glean what is absolutely necessary for the interest of his client, if a suit be established, as also to distinguish whether a client has such a case as would warrant his resorting to the Ecclesiastical Court. And again, presuming that the bill alluded to should ultimately receive the sanction of the legislature, the forms would possibly be more serviceable to the profession in general, particularly to country practitioners, inasmuch as they are at present very little acquainted with the forms of statements, or of the evidence necessary to substantiate the claim of parties in the Ecclesiastical Courts. At least it is hoped that these forms will be available in assisting their judgment in furthering the proceedings in certain suits, ultimately intended to be removed for adjudicature before justices of the peace, or the superior Courts of law.

Observations on the Rules and Orders of Ecclesiastical Courts since A. D. 1826.

Since the year 1826 several New Rules and Orders have been framed, and received the sanction of the late and present learned judge of the Arches and Prerogative Courts, and the Chancellor of London, and by them promulgated as regulations for the guidance of the practitioners in the Arches and Prerogative Courts of Canterbury, and Consistory Court of London.

These rules have very much altered and improved the previous practice in these Courts, and the procrastination and delay, and consequent increase of expense attendant thereon observable in those Courts, have been remedied by the new orders; the practitioners being thereby called upon to perform

PRACTICE IN

COURTS.

certain acts within a given period; and, by these means, causes CHAP. VII. of great magnitude, involving intricate questions, or requiring ECCLESIASTICAL the examination of witnesses in distant parts of the kingdom, are now frequently adjudicated within twelve months, and testamentary causes, where the witnesses are examined in town, have been decided within six months, and some within a less period of time, and this without injuring the claims of the respective parties by too hasty a course of proceeding.

The benefit resulting from these rules to the different suitors will be apparent, when it is stated that, under the system which existed in these Courts prior to the new regulations, a vexatious opposition might have protracted the proceedings, and delayed, if not defeated, justice.

tures from these

Although the practitioners in all ordinary cases are required When excepto comply with these several orders, in some cases circum- tions or deparstances will arise that authorize a departure therefrom; and rules permitted. the judge at all times is inclined to listen to any application made for that purpose, and to grant further time to the practitioner, upon his showing sufficient grounds, and that the interest of the suitor is liable to be prejudiced unless the time be allowed or extended.

of the 1st ses

to publication bringing in Al

of evidence,

By an order of Court, made on the first session of Easter Order of Court Term, 1827, Sir John Nicholl, then dean of the Arches, pro- sion of Easter mulgated several rules to regulate the practice in the Arches Term, 1827, as and Prerogative Courts, respecting the publication of evidence taken in a cause, the bringing in allegations or pleas, the mode of proceeding to procure the answers of adverse parties, the manner of applying for an extension of time, and a regulation as to costs, in event of neglect or delay. (a)

On the third session of Hilary Term, 1830, the official principal of the Arches Court issued several new rules, calculated to facilitate justice, by appointing extra Court days for dispatch of business, and getting rid of any arrear without waiting for the approaching term; the advantage resulting from these rules is obvious, when it is considered that a cause ripe for hearing on the last day of one term is disposed of on an additional or extra Court day, appointed for the hearing thereof, instead of its standing over to the first session of the ensuing term; there are also contained therein several excellent regulations as to proceeding " In Pœnam," and of the practitioner being prepared to proceed for the plaintiff or defendant

(a) See form, post, 125.

legations and

Pleas, enfor cing answers

from adverse parties, extension of time, and as to costs.

Order of Court of 3rd session of Hilary Term,

1830.