PLEADING (ante), in the common-law system until recently followed in most of the states, differed greatly from the equity pleading and that employed in the admiralty courts. In the last the " libel" of the complainant or "libelant" corresponds to the " declaration" in common law and to the "bill" in equity proceedings, and each sub sequent step was set forth in an "allegation." In equity, the plea responding to the bill is called the "answer," and subsequent pleadings were less formal and technical than in common law. • At common law pleas subsequent to the declaration were either of the nature of a traverse, directly -..antradieting the allegations of the plea next preceding, and thus offering an oppo•t“nity to close the issue; or in the nature of confession and avoidance, not denying the t,uth of the facts claimed by the declaration, but setting up new matter to show the 1...aiintiff not entitled to his action, and to avoid the effect of his allegations. Pleas may be peremptory or dilatory: the former altogether denies a right of action; the latter sets out that the suit has been brought in improper form, or against the party, or before a court lacking jurisdiction. A special plea in bar differs from the general issue in that the latter denies all the material allegations of the preceding plea; and from a special issue, which does not set up new matter but denies some part which, it is claimed, goes to the gist of the action. The issue finally reached may be either one of law, raised by a demurrer; or of fact, as on the acceptance of a traverse. A plea pais darrein continuance sets out that new matter of defense has come to the knowledge of the party presenting the plea, since the last continuance of the case, or the last stage of the suit. The system of common-law pleading was extremely technical and formal,
required great accuracy and precision, and the pleas were cumbered with obsolete and redundant phraseology. In England the old system has been greatly improved by acts of parliament, and in the United States the codes of procedure of a majority of the states have abolished the common-law pleadings, and have done away with the distinction between legal and equitable suits, admitting equitable defenses in all suits. The "com plaint" Usually takes the place of the declaration, the demurrer is retained, the response of the defendant is termed the "answer," and the pleadings never extend beyond the plaintiff's " reply" to the answer. The one point insisted upon is that the conflicting claims of the parties shall lie clearly and distinctly set out, and the points in dispute brought within the jurisdiction and cognizance of the court. The rules of pleading in criminal practice are similar to those in civil practice. The pleas are of five kinds: plea of guilty; to the jurisdiction; in abatement; in demurrer, and pleas in bar. Pleas in bar (in criminal cases) may be of four kinds: former conviction ; former acquittal; pardon; and " not guilty." On refusal of an accused to plead, the court, may order a plea of "not guilty" to be entered. A plea of " nolo contendere" allows an inferior court to give verdict on an bearing, and is made for the purpose of at once taking the case to a higher court. In England a prisoner accused of felony who refused to lead, was formerly subjected to the pressure of heavy weights until he yielded or died. The last application of this peine forte et dare was in 1741. •