Page:Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, Volume 1.djvu/778

 764 V. BENCH AND BAR For nearly two decades the labors of the Judicial Com- mittee were borne mainly by Parke and Brougham. Some of Brougham's most useful services were rendered in this court, where his encyclopedic mind and liberal views are displayed to best advantage. These two judges were to a great extent relieved by the accession in 1844< of Kingsdown, who served in this court with great distinction for more than twenty years. Kingsdown was one of the great judges of his time. Although a lawyer of vast and varied learning, his grasp of principle led him to deal but little with precedents. In the formulation of the conclusions of the court, in which he bore the principal part, his refined taste and fastidious use of language made his opinions models of judicial expression. From 1854 he practically took charge of appeals in prize cases, interpreting the law of blockade, capture and prize with marked liberality towards freedom of trade. His opin- ions in the cases of The Franciska, The Gerasimo, and Dyke V. Wolford, in the eighth volume of the State Trials, are good specimens of his style and method.^ II. From the Common Law Procedure of 1852 to the Judicature Acts of 1873-75 A well defined change in the administration of English law occurred shortly after the middle of the century. Years of those of Acton and Knapp. The former (1809-11) is made up mostly of brief opinions in prize and colonial cases by Sir William Grant, who was during the early part of the century the dominant influence in the court. The reports of the court under its modern establish- ment begin with Knapp (1829-36), and the two series of his successor, Moore, overlap the authorized reports. of the law: Schacht v. Otter, 9 Moo. P. C. 150; Allen v. Maddock, 11 do. 438; Baltazzi v. Ryder, 12 do, 168; Kirchner v. Venus, 12 do. 361; Secretary of State of India v. Kamachee Boye Sahaba, 13 do. 22; Bland v. Ross, 14 do. 210; Ward v. McCorkill, 15 do. 133; Attorney General of Bengal v. Ranee Surnomoye Dossee, 2 Moo. P. C. (n. s.) 22; Cleary v. McAndrew, 2 do. 216; Brown v. Gugv, 2 do. 341; Austen V. Graham, 1 Spink 357; The Otsee, 2 do. 170; The Julia, Lush. 224; The Hamburgh, Br. and Lush. 271. His opinions in ecclesiastical cases were likewise characterized by breadth of mind. Among his most prominent cases of this kind are Gorham v. Bishop of Exeter, Liddell v. Weaterton, Long v. Bishop of Capetown, and the Essays and Reviews case.
 * The following are among his ablest opinions in various branches