HISTORY AND NATURE OF LAWS. 



water-works, railways, &c. ; and Private Acts, which 

 relate to private and personal interests, such as 

 naturalisation, restitution of honours, change of 

 family name and arms, exchange or sale of 

 entailed property, and the like. 



The necessity of arranging and consolidating 

 the statutes has from time to time been felt and 

 expressed by statesmen. Lord Bacon, in whose 

 days the statute law did not occupy a twentieth 

 part of its present bulk, spoke with alarm of its 

 overgrown size, and recommended that the whole 

 be abridged, in order to its being made manage- 

 able. Something at last has been done to this 

 end, and the existing statute law has been revised 

 and compressed, down to the loth of George III. 

 or the year 1770, into two octavo volumes. The 

 whole is expected to be completed in four volumes. 



The necessity for the reform of the whole 

 system of law, the introduction of one com- 

 prehensive code, and for the revision of judi- 

 cial procedure, has now become very apparent. 

 Although we must still wait for some time 

 longer for a code of the whole law, a step of the 

 greatest importance towards it has been taken 

 by the passing of an act (afterwards explained) 

 during the session of 1873, which amalgamates 

 the jurisdiction of the common law and equity 

 courts, and must before long result in removing 

 all distinction between the two systems, the exist- 

 ence of which was the greatest defect in English 

 law. This act was carried through parliament by 

 Lord Chancellor Selborne, formerly Sir R. Palmer. 



English Law-courts. 



We have now to notice the various courts of 

 law in England. The House of Lords might be 

 considered, until the passing of the Judicature Act 

 of Lord Selborne, just mentioned, as the general 

 court of appeal from the whole kingdom. There 

 is only one set of superior judicatures from which 

 a reference may not come before it in some form 

 or other the criminal court of Scotland. The 

 origin of parliament is connected with the great 

 council of the feudal kings, which gave them 

 advice both in legislative and judicial matters. 

 When parliament was separated into two houses, 

 the judicial business was kept by the upper, and, 

 probably at the instigation of the bishops, the 

 Lords adopted the power of administering oaths, 

 not possessed by the Commons a circumstance 

 which more distinctly marked their judicial char- 

 acter. But though the appeal is nominally taken 

 to the House of Lords, it is heard and decided on 

 by one or more of the eminent lawyers, of whom 

 there are always several in the house, and gener- 

 ally by the Lord Chancellor. Until the case of 

 O'Connell in 1844, the lay or non-legal lords 

 occasionally exercised their privilege of judging 

 in appeals. Independently of their powers as 

 judges of appeal, the Peers act as a criminal court 

 in all cases where a peer of the realm is tried for 

 a capital crime, presided over by a judge, called 

 the Lord High Steward. This official is properly 

 the judge, the peers acting as a jury, and giving 

 their verdict on the question of guilt. The 

 directly feudal origin of this rule of ancient practice 

 will be at once recognised. 



The principal courts were divided into courts 

 of common law and courts of equity. The 

 former were three in number : the King's or 



Queen's Bench, the Common Pleas, and the- 

 Exchequer. Each had a chief, and four assistant 

 judges, called puisne or junior judges. These 

 courts date their origin from the Conquest. On 

 feudal principles, the Norman kings called all the 

 principal causes which had, under the Saxons, 

 proceeded before the county courts, to be decided 

 in their own hall, or court, by their own great 

 council, which was presided over by an officer 

 called the Justiciar. This court, called the Aula 

 or Curia Regis, the King's Court, at first followed 

 the king's person a great inconvenience, removed 

 by Magna Charta, which fixed it permanently in 

 Westminster. Under Edward I. the system was 

 adopted of sending deputations from the court 

 twice a year to try cases in various parts of the 

 country the origin of the present assize or circuit 

 courts. Under the same monarch, the jurisdic- 

 tion of the court was split into three parts. To 

 the Justiciar, afterwards called Chief-justice, were 

 assigned the pleas of the crown, as they were 

 termed, involving all the graver offences ; and 

 as he was the highest judicial officer in point of 

 rank, his court was appointed to have cognisance 

 over the two others. The matters connected 

 with the exchequer the regulation of the royal 

 domains, the collection of duties and other taxes 

 were committed to judges called Barons, pre- 

 sided over by a Chief-baron. All questions about 

 the possession of land, and other litigations 

 between one citizen and another regarding matters 

 of property, were called ' common pleas,' and were 

 committed to certain justices, presided over by a 

 Chief-justice. 



The King's or Queen's Bench was thus the chief 

 criminal court, and the Exchequer the principal 

 tribunal for revenue matters ; but these courts 

 were by no means restricted to the departments 

 to which they were so assigned possessing, con- 

 currently with the common pleas, a jurisdiction 

 in all ordinary questions of common law. 



An appeal lay from any one of the courts to- 

 I the judges of the other two, who, when met 

 j to decide on such appeals, constitute a court 

 called the Exchequer Chamber. Fourteen of 

 the fifteen judges who form these common-law 

 courts hold assizes in the various county towns 

 in some of them twice, and in others thrice a year. 

 Here they act both as civil and criminal judges. 

 Offences committed in London and its vicinity 

 are tried by a tribunal lately created, called the 

 Central Criminal Court. From the assizes, an 

 appeal is competent to the court in London by a 

 motion for a new trial on the ground that the 

 judge misdirected the jury, or that the verdict was 

 contrary to the evidence. 



The principal equity tribunal in England was 

 that of the Chancery. It had in it three distinct 

 courts, and three judges the chancellor, the vice- 

 chancellor, and the master of the rolls ; latterly, 

 the number of vice-chancellors was increased to- 

 three. At one time, all proceedings in bankruptcy 

 centred in the lord chancellor, but the increasing 

 importance of this class of business rendered it 

 necessary to appropriate a separate court to the 

 purpose. This was accomplished in 1832 by Lord 

 Brougham ; and since then, the utility and im- 

 portance of the Insolvent Debtors' Court have been 

 materially enlarged. Another court is called the 

 Judicial Committee of the Privy-council Itconsists 

 of selected judges of the other courts, and retired 



