Definition
"Of process" is an archaic term from equity pleading referring to a specific clause within a bill in equity — the portion of the bill in which the complainant requests that the court compel the defendant to appear, answer the bill's allegations, and submit to the court's determination of the matter. It was, in essence, the prayer for service of process embedded within the bill itself.
In the procedural architecture of traditional equity practice, a bill in equity was composed of several distinct parts — the address, the premises (stating the facts and grievances), the confederating clause, the charging clause, the interrogating clause, the jurisdiction clause, the prayer for relief, and the prayer of process. "Of process" denotes this last functional element: the formal demand that process issue against the named defendants to bring them before the court.
The clause required that all defendants be named, including those beyond the court's territorial jurisdiction, because the court needed a complete accounting of all parties whose rights and obligations were at issue before fashioning equitable relief.
Common Language
This is pure legal and procedural jargon with no meaningful counterpart in common usage. The word "process" in ordinary speech carries a general meaning of a series of steps or a procedure. In legal usage, "process" specifically denotes the formal mechanism by which a court asserts authority over a person — typically a writ, summons, or other compulsory instrument. The phrase "of process" as a term of art in equity pleading has no analog outside historical court practice.
Common Confusion
"Of process" should not be confused with "process" standing alone. "Process" in legal usage broadly encompasses any writ or instrument by which a court compels appearance or compliance — including writs of summons, subpoenas, attachments, and execution. "Of process" is a narrower, structural term: it identifies a specific pleading clause within a bill in equity, not the writ or instrument itself. Researchers may also encounter the phrase "prayer for process," which refers to the same structural element and can be used interchangeably.
Why It Matters in Research
This term matters almost exclusively to researchers working in pre-merger equity practice — primarily English chancery procedure and early American equity courts operating before the merger of law and equity under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1938) and equivalent state-level procedural reforms.
Several research traps to flag:
First, the term appears as a structural label when reading or analyzing historical bills in equity. Misidentifying or overlooking the "of process" clause can cause researchers to misread the scope of relief sought or to misconstrue which parties were formally before the court.
Second, the requirement that all parties be named in the process clause — even those outside the jurisdiction — has direct implications for understanding early American jurisdictional doctrine and the development of in personam equity jurisdiction. Courts wrestled with how to proceed when named defendants could not be reached by the court's process, leading to doctrines of publication and service by notice that predate modern long-arm statutes.
Third, because Bouvier's entry appears truncated (ending mid-sentence), researchers should treat the Law Mind source as incomplete on this term and consult the full text of Bouvier's, Mitford's Equity Pleadings, or Cooper's Equity Pleading for complete treatment.
Fourth, the citations embedded in Bouvier's entry (1 P. Wms. 593; 2 Dick. Ch. 707; 2 Johns. Ch. 245) point to English and early American chancery reporters. Researchers tracing this doctrine through primary sources will need access to Peere Williams, Dickens's Chancery Reports, and Johnson's Chancery (New York), which are specialized historical reporters not always indexed in general legal databases.
Historical Dictionary Support
Bouvier's Law Dictionary is the primary historical source for this term and offers a technically precise definition: "that part of the bill which asks that the defendant may be compelled to appear and answer the bill, and abide the determination of the court upon the subject." Bouvier's emphasis on the requirement that all parties be named — even those outside the jurisdiction — reflects established chancery practice and is consistent with authorities cited, including Mitford's Equity Pleading and Cooper's Equity Pleading.
The entry is notably truncated in available versions, cutting off mid-sentence after "The ordinary," which suggests the full Bouvier's entry continued with a description of the ordinary form or language of the clause. This gap is a known limitation of some digitized versions of Bouvier's.
No other historical legal dictionaries in the Law Mind corpus independently treat "of process" as a standalone entry; the concept is typically absorbed into broader treatments of "bill in equity," "prayer," or "process" in those sources. Bouvier's stands alone in isolating the term and giving it a dedicated entry.
Jurisdictional Note
The term belongs entirely to the equity pleading tradition derived from English chancery. In American jurisdictions, the concept was absorbed into unified civil procedure following the adoption of the Federal Rules and analogous state rules, where a single complaint and summons replaced the elaborate multi-clause structure of the bill in equity. Researchers in states with late procedural unification may encounter the term in local equity practice materials into the twentieth century.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Due Process of Law — Substantive Due Process Origins and Framework (The Law Mind Constitutional Law Encyclopedia). Note: the connection is tangential — "of process" in equity pleading is procedurally distinct from due process as a constitutional doctrine, but researchers tracing the concept of compelled appearance and judicial authority over persons will find relevant foundational context in that entry.