a defendant could plead to an action of assumpsit just as many defences as he chose; first, he could deny the whole by pleading the general issue; then he could plead the statute of limitations, infancy, accord and satisfaction, and a dozen other pleas, by which the plaintiff would be deprived of any clue to the real defence.  I suppose it was this practice of formal lying which has given rise to the popular error that a lawyer is in the habit of lying, or is obliged to lie, in his arguments.  Many people do not know the difference between pleading—­ which is a process in writing to bring the parties to an issue—­ and the oral arguments of counsel in courts.  It is ridiculous to suppose that it is easy or profitable for lawyers to make false statements in their arguments.  The opposing counsel is ready to catch at anything of the kind; and if he misstates the evidence, the jury are aware of it; while if he states what is not law, the court generally knows it.  So there is no opportunity for lying even if a lawyer should be so disposed.  The practice in civil actions as provided by the statutes of Minnesota is similar—­ if not actually the same—­ to the New York code of practice.  There is but one form of action, called an action of contract.  The only pleading on the part of the plaintiff is, 1st, the complaint; 2d, the reply.  On the part of the defendant, 1st, demurrer; or 2d, the answer. (Stats. ch. 70, sec. 58.) The complaint must contain, 1st, the title of the cause, specifying the name of the court in which the action is brought and the names of the parties to the action, plaintiff and defendant; 2d, a statement of the facts constituting the cause of action in ordinary and concise language, without repetition, and in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended; 3d, a demand of the relief to which the plaintiff supposes himself entitled.  If the recovery of money be demanded the amount must be stated. (Ibid. sec. 59.)

While testifying my approval of this code of practice as a whole, I cannot resist saying that in many respects it is not so systematic as the Massachusetts code, which was devised by Messrs. Curtis (now Mr. Justice), Lord, and Chapman.  That code is one of the best in the world.  And if I may be allowed one word more about special pleading, I would say that there is no branch of law which will better reward study.  Without mentioning the practice in the U. S. courts, which requires, certainly, a knowledge of special pleading, no one can read the old English reports and text books with much profit, who is ignorant of the principles of that science.

A class of business peculiar to new territories and states arises from the land laws.  A great many pre-emption cases are contested before the land officers, in which the services of lawyers are required.  This fact will partly explain why there are, generally, so many lawyers located in the vicinity of a land office.  In a community that is newly settled the title to property must often be in dispute; and however much averse people may be to going to law, they find it frequently indispensable, if they wish to have their rights settled on a firm basis.