Page:Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, Volume 1.djvu/792

 778 V. BENCH AND BAR cases, in which he was extremely accurate. Smith was an all-round influence for good; sagacious, sensible and prac- tical, he added to the high standing of his tribunal. During this period the Court of Exchequer declined in reputation, particularly during the latter half. Kelly, who succeeded Pollock in 1866 as Chief Baron, was old and soon became infirm; and an ill-assorted collection of barons, of whom Martin was the ablest,^ detracted from the unity and authority of the court. Nevertheless, this court was distin- guished throughout the period by the services of Bramwell (1856-76). In any consideration of modern English judges Baron Bramwell must hold a conspicuous place. In mere length of service (thirty-six years) he is surpassed in modern times only by Baron Parke, whom he succeeded. He is an interest- ing link between the past and the present. Coming to the bar soon after Lord Tenterden apologetically made a few changes in the supposed perfections of the common law, he lived to frame the Common Law Procedure Act and to assist in the final overthrow of the old system by the Judicature Act. He was doubtless a great lawyer and a learned judge, but his marked personality exerted an influence not limited by learning — the breezy, invigorating influence of sturdy common sense caustically applied to particular problems. In almost every respect he was a complete contrast to his pro- saic predecessor, Baron Parke. He chose to mask a genial and generous nature under the garb of humorous cynicism; but in reality he was no cynic. Throughout his career he was one of the most popular as well as interesting of the judges. With a personality as vigorous as that of Maule or of Westbury, he was one of the sturdiest, manliest and kind- est of men.^ He did not always respect conventional tradl- ^ Miller v. Salomons, 7 Ex. 475, etc.; Embrev v. Owen, 6 ib. 353; Bellamy v. Majoribanks, 7 ib. 389; Crouch n. Great Northern Ry.. 11 ib. 742; Hubbertsty v. Ward, 8 ib. 330; Read v. Legard, 6 ib' 636; Dublin Ry. v. Black, 8 ib. 181. ' Upon his retirement he could recall only one unpleasantness. " Once a very old and dear friend of mine provoked me so much and made me so angry that I actually threatened to commit him, and I remember that on my asking him what he would have done if I had committed him, he answered promptly, ' Move for my own discharge.' "