Chancery Chambers Reports (Volume 1)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1868. Excerpt: ... defendant with a subpoena, an office copy of the bill was to be served upon him, and that such service was to be effected in the same manner that service of a subposna was then effected; and by subsequent Orders it is provided that the defendant is to answer or demur within a time limited, or that the bill might be taken pro confesso. The effect of this, as compared with the former practice, was that the filing of a bill was made equivalent to the filing of a bill and the issuing of a subpoena; and the service of a bill was made equivalent to the service of a subpoena, consequently if, after the filing of a bill and the issuing of a subpoena at one date, the service of a subpoena a year and a half afterwards would be good service, I see nothing to prevent the service of a bill a year and a half after its filing being a good service. At the date of the Order to which I have referred, no time was limited for the service of a subpoena, as computed from the filing of the bill, unless the rule enunciated in the anonymous case in Vernon, (1 Ver. 172, ) applies. It is stated thus, "If a cause has slept twelve months in court, there shall be no proceeding had upon it without first serving a subpoena ad faciendum attornat." Whether this applied only to a cause in which a subpoena had been served, or applied also to where the writ had only been issued, it shews the delay did not put the cause out of court; it had "slept," but was not dead, and might have been proceeded with by taking a course which has now long been obsolete. The subpoena itself being returnable within the year, that is so many days after service, and in England not beyond the ensuing term, can made no difference, as there was nothing to prevent the issuing of an alias writ. In England the service f...