It was further provided that if any person appointed under that act was at the date of his appointment a judge as aforesaid, he should vacate his office as such judge, but his pension should remain the same as if no such appointment had been made, and that each should receive a salary of five thousand pounds per annum. It was further provided that the paid judges of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council should hold their offices notwithstanding the demise of the crown, but they should be removable by Her Majesty, her heirs or successors upon the address of both Houses of Parliament.

THE HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

This court might properly be divided into four heads: 1. The Lord High Chancellor.

2. The Court of Appeal in Chancery.

3. The Master of the Rolls.

4. The Vice-Chancellors.

First. The jurisdiction and duties of the Lord Chancellor were too well known to require a detailed enumeration thereof. They are given in the "Practice in Chancery," Choyce Cases in Chancery (57-61). An appeal would lie from his judgments to the House of Lords.

Second. The Court of Appeal in Chancery.- An addition was also made (14 & 15 Vict. chap. 83; 30 & 31 Vict. chap. 64) of two judges called the Lord Justices of the Court of Appeal in Chancery; which court consisted of the Lord Chancellor together with these judges and which possessed all the jurisdiction exercised by the Lord Chancellor himself, so far as his judicial business, in Chancery, was concerned, without prejudice, however, to his right to sit, as formerly, alone.

To this court, the powers of which might be exercised not only by its full body, but by either of its judges together with the Lord Chancellor, or by both the judges (or for some purposes by either of them sitting separately) apart from the Lord Chancellor. An appeal from the Master of the Rolls or from any of the Vice-Chancellors might be referred to it, or such appeal might be entertained by the Lord Chancellor, sitting alone, in his proper jurisdiction. This court also entertained appeals in bankruptcy. From these jurisdictions an ultimate appeal might be taken to the House of Lords.

Third. The Master of the Rolls.-The judicial duties of the Court of Chancery had been long shared, in some measure, by an officer of high rank called the Master of the Rolls who was originally appointed only for the superintendence of the writs and records appertaining to its common law department, but accustomed to sit also on the equity side as a separate, though a subordinate, judge. By statute (3 Geo. II, chap. 30), passed to settle divers disputes, it was enacted that all orders and decrees by him made, except such as by the course of the court were appropriated to the great seal alone, should be deemed to be valid, subject nevertheless to be discharged or altered by the Lord Chancellor. By a subsequent statute (3 & 4 William IV, chap. 94, sec. 24), the Master of the Rolls (subject to the same qualification) was especially directed to hear motions, pleas and demurrers, as well as causes generally which should be set down before him. Appeal might be taken from his judgment and was heard by the Lord Chancellor or the Court of Chancery Appeal, as heretofore stated. The origin of this officer, his oath of office and the duties of the incumbent are fully given in the "Practice in Chancery," Choyce Cases in Chancery (61–66.)

Fourth. The Vice-Chancellors.-The increase of business in the Court of Chancery rendered it necessary that an assistant to the Lord Chancellor, in his judicial functions, should be appointed. One was accordingly appointed in 1813 with the title of Vice-Chancellor. In 1841, after the transfer of the equity business of the Court of Exchequer to the High Court of Chancery, two more Vice-Chancellors were added to its judicial list. They sat and acted separately. An appeal from the decision of either might be taken, which was heard by the Lord Chancellor alone, by the Lord Chancellor sitting with the Lord Justices, or by the Lord Justices alone as heretofore stated.

COMMON LAW COURTS,

There were three courts of common law jurisdiction; the Court of Queen's Bench, the Court of Common Pleas, and the Court of Exchequer, which, when mentioned collectively, were usually called the Superior Courts of the Common Law, and when taken in connection with the High Court of Chancery, were called the Courts at Westminster.

The judges were the legal advisers of the House of Lords and were frequently called upon by that body for their opinions upon questions of law before it.

PREFACE.

WITH this volume, commencing the cases under the English Judicature Act, a few words are necessary.

In order to understand the changes made by the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875, it is necessary to consider briefly the formation and powers of the courts in England before the passage of those acts, and then to show the changes effected thereby. We proceed, firstly, to show the construction and powers of such courts before those acts, borrowing quite largely from the preface to the second volume of these reports, and, secondly, to show the changes wrought by the Judicature Acts.

Before those acts the courts of England material to be inquired of were:

THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

The House of Lords was, as a general rule, a tribunal of appeal, in all causes of common law or equity, commenced in England, Ireland or Scotland, such appeal being original, or after the intervention of a previous appeal to another court, as the case might be. It was the court of last resort, from whose judgment no further appeal was permitted, and every subordinate tribunal was bound to conform to its determinations.

There was no appeal to the House of Lords from the Ecclesiastical, Maritime or Prize Courts in England, nor from India or any of the colonies. The appeal in such cases was to the Queen in Council and was heard before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

THE PRIVY COUNCIL.

This, according to Sir Edward Coke (4 Inst., 53), was a noble, honorable and reverend assembly of the King, and such as he willed to be of his Privy Council, in the King's Court or Palace.

His will was the sole constituent of a Privy Councillor and this also regulated their number. The Privy Council was formerly dissolved by the death of the sovereign; but by statute (6 Anne, chap. 7), the Privy Council continues for six months after the demise of the sovereign, unless sooner determined by his successor. So far as the present inquiry is concerned it may be stated that the Privy Council had in certain cases the judicial authority of a court of justice: 1. In Colonial causes; this was both original and appellate; 2. In appeals from the Lord Chancellor in matters of lunacy; 3. In appeals from the ecclesiastical or maritime courts; 4. In applications to prolong the term of patents for new inventions, and in certain cases arising out of the copyright acts.

Under the provisions of modern statutes all the judicial authority of the Privy Council was exercised by a select number of its members, called the Judicial Committee, which heard the allegations and proofs and made its report thereon to "Her Majesty in Council" by whom the judgment was finally given. By statute (3 & 4 William IV, chap. 41, sec. 1; 14 & 15 Vict. chap. 83, sec. 15), this committee consisted of the President of the Council, the Lord Chancellor, and the Lord Justices of the Appeal in Chancery, if of the Privy Council, the Lord Keeper or First Lord Commissioner of the Great Seal, the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, the Master of the Rolls, the Vice-Chancellors, the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, the Judge of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty, the Chief Judge in Bankruptcy and also all persons who were members of His Majesty's Privy Council, who should have been president thereof or should have held the office of Lord Chancellor or any of the offices before mentioned. Two other persons, being members of the Council, might also be appointed by the Crown to be members of the Judicial Committee. No matter could be heard or report made unless in the presence of at least three of the committee, exclusive of the Lord President for the time being.

By 34 & 35 Vict. chap. 91 (Aug. 21, 1871), the Queen was authorized to appoint four additional persons members of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council who should be or should have been judges of the Superior Courts at Westminster, or a Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, or Madras or Bombay.