Definition
"Tout temps prist" is a Law French phrase meaning "always ready." In pleading, it denotes the defendant's averment in the old plea of tender that he has always been and remains ready to discharge a debt or obligation. The phrase was a formal declaration embedded in the plea, signaling continuous willingness to pay — not that the defendant was presently making payment, but that no refusal or default on his part had ever occurred. The companion phrase "et uncore prist" ("and still ready") completed the plea, extending the averment to the present moment.
Common Confusion
"Tout temps prist" is sometimes treated as interchangeable with "tender" itself, but the two are distinct. Tender is the act — the actual offer of payment. "Tout temps prist" is the pleading formula — the defendant's sworn assertion of perpetual readiness to pay, which was the mechanism by which a tender plea was preserved and communicated to the court. A defendant who had made a valid tender but failed to include the "tout temps prist" averment risked a defective plea.
Why It Matters in Research
This phrase appears almost exclusively in materials predating the procedural reforms of the nineteenth century. Researchers working in early common law pleading — particularly actions of debt and covenant — will encounter it in Year Books, early English reports, and treatises on common law practice. Its significance is largely historical: modern pleading codes abolished the formal plea of tender as a distinct common law form, folding tender doctrine into affirmative defense practice under reformed procedural rules.
The phrase is a reliable marker of vintage. If it appears in a document, that document is almost certainly drawing on common law pleading practice from the era before the English Judicature Acts (1873–1875) or, in American jurisdictions, before code pleading reforms of the mid-nineteenth century (Field Code, 1848, and its successors). Researchers should not expect to find the phrase in modern American or English procedural contexts.
The corpus connection between "tout temps prist" and the broader law of tender is important. Tender doctrine — its requirements, its effect on accruing interest and costs, its technical execution — survived the procedural reforms; only the archaic pleading form did not. A researcher tracing tender from early sources into modern practice must distinguish between the substantive doctrine (still alive) and the procedural formula (obsolete).
The Latin equivalent, "semper paratus," performs the same function in Latin-language pleading records and civil law contexts. Researchers using Latin Year Books or ecclesiastical court records may encounter "semper paratus" where common law English records would show "tout temps prist."
Historical Dictionary Support
All three historical dictionaries agree on the core meaning and function of the phrase. Black's (both editions) and Burrill converge on the same authority trail: Blackstone's Commentaries (3 Bl. Comm. 303) and Salkeld's Reports (2 Salk. 622). The definitions are substantively identical, which reflects the settled, formulaic nature of the term — it was never contested or ambiguous in legal usage.
Burrill adds the most value of the three sources. He supplies the Latin equivalent ("semper paratus"), identifies the dual-phrase structure of the full plea ("tout temps prist... et uncore prist"), and cites Year Book authority (Yearb. M. 3 Hen. VI. 30; P. 11 Hen. VI. 6) that predates Blackstone by several centuries. This gives the phrase a documented pedigree reaching back to fifteenth-century pleading practice. Burrill's entry is the most useful starting point for researchers who need to trace the plea into primary sources.
Neither edition of Black's surfaces the "et uncore prist" companion phrase or the Year Book citations, which means a researcher relying solely on Black's would have an incomplete picture of how the full plea operated. Burrill corrects this gap.
Jurisdictional Note
"Tout temps prist" is a feature of English common law pleading and was carried into American colonial and early republic practice wherever common law pleading forms were adopted. American jurisdictions that enacted Field Code-style reforms in the nineteenth century effectively retired the formula, though courts continued to cite pre-reform tender cases in which the phrase appeared.