Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 13.pdf/109

 84

by Chief Justice Cockburn in Banks v. Goodfellow, 5 Q. B. 549. Lord (Tottenham (1836-41; 1846-50) brought to the discharge of his duties a complete mastery of the existing principles and practice of the court of chancery, which

learned but plodding lawyer, left the court of Common Pleas, where he was serving with credit, to assume the chancellorship, for which he had no particular qualifications. He sacrificed his life in attempting to cope with the work.

SIR FREDERICK. POLLOCK, AFTERWARDS BARON POLLOCK.

he regarded as the perfection of human wis dom. Outside this sphere his learning was limited; and his mind was vigorous and sound rather than broad and subtle. He was an able and painstaking, if somewhat cautious, judge.1 His successor, Lord Truro (1850-52), a 1 Auchterarder case, 6 Cl. & F. 46; O'Connell's case, ii do. 155; Tullett v. Armstrong: Scarbor ough v. Borman, 4 Myln & Cr. 120; Cookson v.

Lord St. Leonards (1852), who next held the seals for a brief period, within his limits Cookson, 12 Cl. & F. I2I; Atwood p. Small, 6 do. 232; Shore i'. Wilson, 9 do. 353; R. v. Millis, ю do. 534; Stokes v. Heron, 12 do. 163; Uunlop i Higgins. i H. L. Cas. 351; Wilson v. Wilson, i do. 538: Faun v. Malcomson, i do. 637; Thynne r. Earl of Glengall, 2 do. 131; Duke of Brunswick f. King of Hanover, 2 do. i; Foley v. Hill, 2 do. 28; Piers t'. Piers, 2 do. 331; Charlton's case, 2 Myl. & Cr. 316; Pym v. Locker, 5 do. 29.