HIGH COURT OF MADRAS. 



153 



Vested interests being thus provided for, it is perhaps to be 

 regretted that it was not determined to adopt for the future 

 one or other of the two systems, and to have either Advocates 

 and Attornies, or Vakeels alone, but by the rules of 1st 

 October 1863 and 30th April 1870 provision was made for 

 the qualification and admission not only of Advocates and 

 Attornies-at-Law, but also of Vakeels entitled as such to 

 practise on both the Original and Appellate Sides of the Court. 

 This was considered a grievance by the Attornies, and in 

 July 1874 they presented a petition to the Chief Justice and 

 other Judges of the Court praying that the right of the 

 Vakeels to practise might be restricted to the Appellate Side, 

 and that their Lordships would concede to the Attornies the 

 right to practise on the Appellate Side as Vakeels in the same 

 way as Attornies of the Supreme Court had been permitted 

 to practise in the Sudder. The last part of the prayer was 

 granted, but this did not satisfy the petitioners. A few 

 months afterwards they applied to the Court upon a formal 

 petition supported by the arguments of Counsel for an order 

 that the rules permitting Vakeels to practise on the Original 

 Side of the Court should be cancelled on the ground that 

 such rules were not authorised by the charter of 1862 and 

 that the wording of the amended charter was not in accord- 

 ance with the provisions of the Statute 24 and 25 Vic, c. 104, 

 under which both the charters were issued. The application 

 was refused, but the Chief Justice, in delivering the judg- 

 ment of a full Bench, said that although the Judges enter- 

 tained no doubt on the question of law, it appeared to them 

 that in some respects the petitioners had reason to complain 

 of the operation of the rules. 115 



One other clause of the Supreme Court's charter may be 

 noticed here, — that by which the Governor and Council were 



115 In the matter of the petition of the Attornies. — Indian Law Reports, 

 1 Madras Series, p. 24. 



21 



