And he at once endorses a few words on the bottom of the summons.
Then a defendant appears in person:
Master: "Do you owe the £26?"
Defendant: "Yes, sir."
Plaintiff's solicitor: "We only want judgment for £21 because this morning he paid £5 on account, and he agrees to pay £3 a week, so that we will not issue execution if he does this."
Master: "I'll give you judgment generally for £21, but you write defendant a letter stating that you will not issue execution as you have just stated."
Another defendant appears in person:
Defendant: "I've got no defence, all I want is time."
Plaintiff's solicitor: "We'll do nothing until Monday as we think he means to pay."
Master: "All right, it is understood you will do nothing until Monday."
The details of practice before these Masters would be beyond the scope of the present writing, suffice it to say that rules have been promulgated from time to time, and are constantly being improved upon, having for their object the simplification of procedure, the rapid despatch of business and the settling of all minor questions which may arise in a case before actual trial. Thus, "Order XIV," just referred to, enables a Master to enter judgment when the defence averred, even if true, would not be effectual, or when the defence is obviously frivolous, although, of course, the rights of the defendant are preserved by the privilege of appeal, the judgment, meantime, binding his property. Again, the "summons for directions" is to enable the Master to give general directions as to how the parties shall proceed, the intervals of time to be allowed for exchange of copies of documents, taking foreign testimony and what not.
One of the cleverest contrivances in the practice before Masters is the "tender of damages in tort without admitting liability." A defendant may tender, say, £500. If plaintiff does not accept it, the trial ensues—the jury, of course, being in ignorance of the tender. If the judgment be for defendant, or for more than the tender, that is the end of the matter. But if the judgment be for less than the tender, a large deduction for costs is made from the judgment, and inures to the defendant's benefit. This has enormously reduced the volume of accident cases and has also curbed the often wildly extravagant demands and unjust results in such actions generally recognized as evils difficult to deal with.
In short, the system of Masters in England works admirably. It is entirely adaptable to American courts, the details and modifications which might prove necessary being fitted to local conditions, but in any such adaptation, the general purpose should be kept in view, namely, that when a case appears upon a trial list it shall have already been pruned of all non-essential preliminary details and is forthwith to be actually tried upon its merits; the court's time being too precious to be expended upon the subsidiary side issues.