that, so far as can be known at present, there is nothing to enable the judges or anybody else to manage things better in the ensuing year than there has been any time since the Judicature Acts. We have had the famous report of the judges and various reports of the Incorporated Law Society and country law societies, as well as of the Bar Committee, upon the report, but for all practical purposes things are, and must remain for the greater part of this year, much as they were in the last. The Courts are sitting in London just now, but about the middle of next month the judges again begin their circuits, and it is impossible that before then the judges' recommendations as to the new circuit system can have become the established arrangement. The elaborate device of the judges for keeping a sufficient supply of their body in London to carry on business is attacked from many quarters, and many people go so far as to say that if it is to be acted on it will be worse than if the fact were boldly faced of the impossibility of keeping circuit business and London going on together satisfactorily, and that therefore the Courts should be closed in London all the time during the circuits. The same paper states the truth in one respect, though it can hardly be admitted that the defect it points out is responsible for the faults of the circuit system. That is not on the shoulders of any judge, Chief Justice or otherwise, but on the old state of things which has been inherited from the past centuries, and which Parliament ought to have altered a considerable time ago. It asks whether the metropolis is once more to be entirely denuded of the common law judges during the month of March, and says it is impossible to answer that question, for the simple reason that her Majesty's judges are not under control. Each of them is a law unto himself; and although the Lord Chief Justice is the titular head or president of the division, he is only in office and not in power, and cannot enforce a request unless the judge to whom it is addressed chooses to comply. This is a criticism which readers of the articles in this REVIEW on the proposed reform of the Courts may remember has already been made upon the machinery of the Judicature Acts; but as far as the circuit system goes, it is, as has been said, a defect of much longer standing, and is simply an instance of the growth of needs greater than the supply which former ages have provided for their descendants-just as the reservoirs of fifty years ago are not sufficient to supply the water which a steadily-growing town requires now. But if, as seems likely from further remarks made in the article in question, the writer is thinking of certain charges which have been made against some of our judges, that they really look upon their circuits as a means of obtaining a pleasant holiday, and that a severe lecture from some one in authority and a peremptory command to get back to town should be sent to the judicial brother who is spending his time in dalliance amongst the beautiful scenery of some quaint old middle-age assize town, or in whipping the neighbouring streams

as a faithful follower of Izaac Walton, we can only say, O sancta simplicitas! quis custodiet custodeum?

The lists with which the Courts begin their new year certainly tell a striking tale of dwindling business. The Appeal Courts furnish the best test of the state of matters in the other Courts, as they are always steadily at work, and yet on the whole ought rather to be a little overburdened than underburdened with the matters sent up to them. However, just now they have so little before them that they will not have enough to do by a great deal; and perhaps some of their number may have to descend into the Nisi Prius Courts, unless they are to return, from their stroll after breakfast down to the Courts for form's sake, into the bosoms of their families. At the beginning of the Michaelmas sittings—that is, those which the Christmas vacation terminated-there were 191 appeals in the two Courts of Common Law and Chancery. At the beginning of these there are only 54 altogether; so that evidently new appeals have been very rare, as was indeed bound to be the case. Prompt decisions are all very well, but when the Court of Appeal is so far forward with its work as is the case now, it throws a light on the unsatisfactory condition of things in the other Courts. It is not a healthy sign that an order made on the last day of the Michaelmas sittings, 1892, can be appealed from and come before the Court of Appeal on the first day of the Hilary sittings, 1893. The lists of the other Courts all show a falling off except that of the Queen's Bench Division, which stands thus-1147 cases as compared with 1005 in the Michaelmas list last year. Now, the Queen's Bench was hardly doing anything at all last sittings in trying actions set down for hearing in London, so that evidently the number of new actions set down is comparatively small. In Chancery, at the commencement of the previous sittings, the cases numbered 770. In that division the judges are admittedly too few, and one of the loud cries of the profession is for the appointment of an additional judge. Yet there are only 694 cases in this sitting's list, whereas, under the circumstances mentioned, an increase might be expected from accumulations, for these Courts have not, like the Court of Appeal, too little to do. A queer thing is the shifting of 84 of these Chancery actions to the Queen's Bench Division, which admittedly is not doing its own work.

The decay of all things legal seems to be the cry at the Temple, and, in the sphere of the law, we have many who, with equal fervour if not so loudly, and with equal certainty if more modesty, as the fervour and conviction of Mr. Robert Buchanan in respect of Christianity, exclaim, "The law is played out!" Does not your own National Observer look forward to the extinction of the legal profession, and confirm its forecast by the statement that there are many well-known advocates who, at the beginning of the year, confessed "with tears" that they had not seen the inside of a civil Court for months? The "tears" are rather hard to believe in; well-known advocates can hardly have been so softened as that by misfortune, nor their lofty looks

brought so low. But the antithesis of civil Court to criminal might lead one to suppose that they had made the acquaintance of a criminal Court at anyrate, and had probably been before a "worthy magistrate" for wandering about the Strand without any visible means of subsistence. Hence these tears-these lachrymæ rerum, as "Tay Pay" says .in the Weekly Sun when he is not saying that so-and-so is "one of the finest things "in all literature."

But the newest symptom of this decay is seen in the question which has been agitating certain circles in the Temple, shall the Inns of Court Rifle Volunteers, the famous "Devil's Own," be allowed to become extinct before the main body of the profession has gone into the limbo of the obsolete? A sad tale was told at a meeting lately summoned by the Treasurer of the Four Inns of Court, and at which attended a great number of judges and leading counsel. It appears the corps used to number about six hundred; now it has only some three hundred and sixty members, and only one hundred and eighty-four of these are barristers or legal students. It would appear from Mr. Justice Chitty's speech that most of our distinguished judges and counsel have served in some capacity or other in the ranks of the corps, and he suggested it was really a recognized road to the bench. But I fear it is very hard to arouse enthusiasm among the young men of a profession which offers to so few of them the means of earning a sufficient income. Show them any bit of work and they jump at it if it promises a fee, but in these unhopeful times they have not the heart of volunteering for anything. "Devilling" is only tolerated for the sake of what it may lead to, and really not very much is got out of that. Less is got out of carrying a rifle, and it means expense. It was said that it need not, because money can always be got from the rich men of the profession; but that is a story which the young men know needs qualification. Many expenses that a man is led into cannot be recouped by subscription. It is a pity the corps should go down; its men are superior, of course, both in physique and style to the ordinary volunteer corps, especially the Cockney ones, amongst whom it is reckoned, or will be reckoned, if it falls beyond a certain numerical standard. These latter are weedy and small in the extreme, and present lamentable contrast to the "Devil's "Own" and some other corps, like the London Scottish or the Artist corps, for example. Such corps as these are valuable in holding up a type of what the volunteer should be, and are always an argument for the higher physical training of the poor unfortunate, ill-trained Londoner. But it is much to be feared the decay in the "Devil's Own" is an outward and visible sign of the decayed condition of the profession which, in more prosperous times, used to supply it with the greater number of its members, but who now form only a small proportion of the nominal strength of the corps.

Kissing the book" is an example of a legal custom which we may say is happily falling into decay. We are all legal

reformers now-a-days, and the sister profession of medicine is coming out strongly as the advocate of reform in this portion of legal administration. In speaking of this subject before, I have mentioned that many doctors in taking the oath are in the habit of quietly opening the book in order that their "osculatory act," as the Daily Telegraph might say, may have effect on the inside and not the outside of the little dirty volume with which the mystic rite is performed. But they are getting bolder both in England and in Ireland, as it seems. In Tyrone a man suffering from cancer of the lips had kissed the book, when a doctor pointed out the danger to subsequent witnesses of their following suit. It would be too dreadful if a witness must either take the oath in that particular fashion or be unable to give his testimony; but in fact there seems to be no legal objection to taking the oath without the kiss, and the Court allowed this to be done.

Then in England there was an incident which shows that the doctors are revolting en masse against the present practice. At Liverpool no fewer than five medical witnesses declined to go through the customary formality. They insisted on being sworn by making the declaration with right hand uplifted. As the Liverpool Mercury, which records this action of the doctors, says, "Most people will be inclined to think that in doing so they set a good example." Fortunately, it only depends upon the judges whether this Scottish method shall become the usual practice; and as it requires no rules of Court nor Act of Parliament, we may hope that even the most conservative of them will not hesitate to use his opportunities of putting an end to a practice which can only be described as disgusting. The matter has been taken up by the Law Times both in an article and in editorial notes, and from the former it seems that a good long time ago in the Chancery Courts a Scottish witness was allowed to be sworn by holding up his right hand without touching the book or kissing it. The form administered was, "You swear according to the custom of your country, and the religion you profess, that," &c. But this is unnecessary, and the words of the English oath which are offered to the witness by the clerk of the Court need not be altered at all. As the Scottish words have been lately brought to the notice of English readers, I may say for Scottish readers that the English words are, "The evidence you shall give in this Court touching the "matters in question shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God." The witness is then usually directed to kiss the book, but that may be presumed to be by way of encouragement to perform a very uninviting task, and not as part of the form itself. The oath in criminal cases is slightly different, but need not be altered to meet what it is to be hoped may be called the new custom. This, the least sentimental of all forms of kissing, has no pleasant associations to save it from its deserved fate; it is the least graceful way in which the sacramental virtue of the kiss has been employed for political or

religious purposes, not even excepting that employed at Rome, and it will become extinct without regret.

SHERIFF GUTHRIE ON THE PRESENT POSITION OF THE SHERIFF COURT OF LANARKSHIRE.

AT the sitting of the first Court in Glasgow after the Christmas vacation, Sheriff Guthrie made the following statement:

It is a wholesome rule that the Courts of Law should be used only for the expression of forensic arguments and judicial opinions in the course of ordinary procedure. There are some recognised exceptions, mostly of a ceremonial or personal bearing, which are perhaps too loosely admitted and sometimes abused. The beginning of a new year, the twentieth year of my service in Glasgow, is not one of these, although it gives me an opportunity of offering to you, gentlemen, a hearty new year greeting and thanks for the forbearance, kindness, and help which I have received from you for many years. I make an exception to the rule on this occasion because some matters of serious importance to the usefulness of this Court are pressing for your attention, and that of the public, and of the Government; and because that attention requires to be aroused by every possible, and even unusual means.

Among the circumstances of the time which provoke observation there are three of chief importance-the proposal to alter and improve this building; the proposal to make the City of Glasgow into a county; and, especially, the emphatic declaration of the Incorporated Society of Law Agents in favour of large alterations in the procedure, jurisdiction, and constitution of the Sheriff Courts. On each of these subjects I make a remark before I pass to the two matters which I desire to press on your notice.

I believe that it is a very general opinion that this building between Wilson Street and Ingram Street is not conveniently situated, and is so arranged as to make it almost impossible to reconstruct it internally into a convenient and adequate court-house for such a city and territory as this. I will not resume the general argument on this subject. It is enough that the Court House Commissioners have declined to consider the question of a change of site. Of two schemes of reconstruction which, if I remember aright, were roughly estimated to cost about £26,000 and £55,000, I have heard that the more expensive has been selected. The less expensive scheme is that which appeared to all or almost all the judges of the Court the more convenient and desirable; and unless there is sure to be a certain degree of finality in the reconstruction, the cheaper plan ought to recommend itself both to Glasgow ratepayers and to the Government. I venture to suggest that if it is shown that there ought to be important changes at an early date, in the judicial establishment and business carried on at Glasgow, it is inexpedient to enter without more deliberation on any expensive

alteration of the Court Houses.

The movement for making the City of Glasgow a county is one which affects the position of the Sheriff Court only incidentally, and I refer to it in the hope partly of removing misapprehension and partly by way of warning against a use that may be made of the suggestion to the detriment of the public. If Glasgow is made a county and so placed