Summary

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Bradford v. Southern Railway Company…

Were it not for the words 'prosecute to conclusion,' we doubt if any court would hold that the act applied to an appeal or writ of error in a civil cause. The applicant, by the statute, must declare the nature of his cause of action. Surely an erroneous ruling by the trial court cannot be held to furnish a 'cause of action,' as that phrase is commonly understood. The statute, by that term, in our judgment, refers to a legal demand by one against another, not to the rulings of a trial court.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Bradford v. Southern Railway Company…

Yet, in strictness, no book holds the word 'action,' or words 'cause of action,' to be identical with a writ of error or cause of a writ of error.
'There can be little doubt that the statute under which this motion is made should be construed strictly; for the pauper comes to litigate entirely at the expense of others. He is neither to pay his own attorneys or counsel, nor is he liable to his adversary should the suit prove to be groundless.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Bradford v. Southern Railway Company…

Rep. 811, where leave was asked to prosecute a writ of error to a state court without giving security as required by § 1000 of the Revised Statutes (U.S.C.omp. Stat. 1901, p. 712) . The ruling would have been the same if the review of the judgment or decree of a court of the United States had been sought; because, in our view, the statute refers only to the court of original jurisdiction. And the same ruling must necessarily obtain in the circuit courts of appeals.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature