SPECIAL TRAVERSE MUST ALWAYS CONSIST OF THREE PARTS. A traverse always consists of three parts, as follows: I. The affirmative part or inducement, which generally' introduces new matter, and constitutes the indirect or argumentative denial. 2. The negative part, which contains the direct denial, and is called, from the Latin word introducing this part, the absque hoc, although similar words, et 11011 (and not) might also be used. 3. The verification and prayer for judgment, witn which the form of traverse originally concluded.
The regular method of pleading in answer to a spe cial traverse is to tender issue upon it, with a repeti tion of the allegation traversed.
The absque hoc was necessitated by the rule of pleading that prohibits argumentative denials. The verification was required by thc rule that wherever new matter is introduced in a pleading-, it is improper to tender issue.
Owing to the prolixity of the special traverse and the fact that it delayed the issue by one step, the courts set themselves against it, and finally laid down the rule that, "where the whole substance of the last plead ing is denied, the conclusion must be to the country, but where one of several facts only is the subject of de nial, the conclusion may be either to the country, or with a verification, at the option of the pleader." The 'inducement in a special traverse should be such as in itself amounts to a sufficient answer in substance to the last preceding pleading, and it must not consist of a direct denial. It must not be in the nature of a confession and avoidance, since this does not deny but rather admits.
The opposite party has no right to traverse the in ducement, except where the denial under the absque hoc is bad. If the absque hoc is sufficient in law, the inducement cannot be confessed and avoided, but if it is insufficient in law the opposite party then has the right to plead in confession and avoidance of the in ducement, or to traverse it ; or he may demur to the whole traverse for the insufficiency of the denial.