156 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



Elizabeth ; but as, with the accession of a new monarch, another Commission 

 was necessary, we find that such was issued in the first year of the reign of 

 King James. 1 It was very similar to the Commission of 1581, and insisted 

 that the judgments of the Commissioners were to have the same validity as 

 and to conform in all things to the procedure of the Star Chamber, which was 

 fully set out in an accompanying document. The Commissioners to whom it 

 was directed were the Lord Deputy, the Lord Chancellor or Keeper of the 

 Great Seal, the Treasurer, Vice-Treasurer, Chief Justice of the King's Bench, 

 the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, the Lord Chief Baron, and the 

 Master of the Bolls ; and of these the first four were to be of the " quorum." 

 There was given the same power to call in associates as we find in the 

 Commission of 1581. 



The commencement of the reign of Charles I saw a new Commission, 

 which was framed on the model of that of James I. This Commission was 

 urgently called for by Lord Falkland and the Council in a letter to 

 Lord Conway, on loth April, 1625, with the caution that, if the winds 

 delayed its arrival, they would presume to renew it under the Great Seal of 

 Ireland. Whether from the winds or some other cause, there was delay, for 

 it was renewed by the Lord Deputy on the 27th April, 1625, whilst the new 

 Commission was not signed by the king till the 1st October of that year. 

 This Commission was directed to the Lord Deputy, Lord Chancellor or 

 Keeper of the Great Seal, the Treasurer, the Chief Justice of the Common 

 Pleas, and the Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer. 



During the reigns of James I and Charles I the Court was overwhelmed 

 with work ; and consequently, to expedite business, the King, by letter of 

 the 24th September, 1634, ordered the Court to sit as often as there was 

 work for it, and not only twice a week in term time. 2 It is interesting to 

 note that at the same time, in the second session of the Parliament of 

 10 Car. I (cap. 3), in an Act against fraudulent conveyances, it was expressly 

 enacted that the Act was not to restrain or impair the jurisdiction, power, or 

 authority of the High Court of Castle Chamber. In the third session of the 

 same Parliament an Act was passed against maintenance, embracery, 

 champerty, &c. (cap. 15). Under this Act an action could lie in the King's 

 Bench for cases which had hitherto come under the cognizance of the Court 

 of Castle Chamber ; but there was an express stipulation that the Act was 

 " not to extend to restrain or limit the power of the Court of Castle Chamber 

 in this realme, but that the Court may at any time proceed to the punishment 



1 Pat, Rolls (Ireland) 1 Jas. I, pt. 2, No. 2, m. 6. 



2 Cal. State Papers (Ireland), 1633-47, p. 78. 



