Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 13.pdf/521

 48o

TJic Green Bag.

on the judge who was first to exercise the new jurisdiction. Fortunately the choice fell on Justice Cresswell.who was transferred from the Common Pleas. Cresswcll was a strong, able and experienced judge, and a man of the world, and at once justified every expectation. Under his guidance the procedure of the court was adapted to modern ideas, witnesses were examined viva vocc in open court, a concise form of pleading was introduced, and parties could, upon application, have any disputed matter of fact tried by a jury. The reports of Swabey and Tristram, which contain his clear and concise opinions and charges to juries, are monuments of learning and common sense; and so skilfully and with such foresight were the modern foundations of this jurisdiction laid that, although he decided nearly a thousand cases, his judg ment is said to have been only once re versed.1 Wilde, an industrious and painstaking judge, who is best remembered by his subse quent title as a legal peer. Lord Penzance, succeeded Cresswell in 1863, and in turn gave way to Lord Hannen in 1872, on the eve of the Judicature Act. COURT OF ADMIRALTY. Lushington continued his distinguished labors in admiralty and ecclesiastical affairs until 1867, when he was succeeded by Phillim ore (1867-83). Through his voluminous writings and his work on the bench Phillimore stands high in scholarship and profes sional learning. In both admiralty and matrimonial affairs he left his mark on the law at a time when a new practice and an increasing volume of litigation gave rise to novel and intricate problems. His elaborate opinions are replete with historical knowl edge, and are always luminously expressed. 1 Hope v. Hope, I Sw. & Tr. 94; Keats v. Keats, i346; Mette v. Mette, 1-416; Tallemache v. Tallemache, 1-561; Tompkins v. Tompkins, 1-168; Ward v. Ward, 1-185-, Egerton v. Brownlow, 4 H. L. I; Sutton v. Sad ler; Coxhead v. Richards, г С. В. 569.

In 1875, under the Judicature Act.he became a member of the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division of the High Court.1 COURT OF APPEAL IN CHANCERY. The Court of Appeal in Chancery, which was established in 1851, was throughout its brief career one of the most satisfactory courts in the history of the English judica ture. The original Lords Justices were Knight-Bruce (1851-66), and Rolfe (185152). Rolfe was soon made chancellor, and Turner (1853-67) succeeded him. The court for fifteen years consisted of Knight-Bruce and Turner—an ideal, court, animated by profound knowledge of law and marked aptitude in its successful application to mod ern conditions. Turner was on all occasions courageous in expanding the remedial powers of the court to meet modern develop ments; and so anxious was Knight-Bruce to shake off the trammels of technical procedure when they interfered with what he conceived to be the justice of the case, that in some of his decisions as Yice-Chancellor (generally overruled by Cotenham) he anticipated reforms which were subsequently made. One of Knight-Bruce's most promi nent cbaracteristics was his fastidious English; and a certain irrepressible humor pervaded his gravest judgments. So vig orous and original was his mind, so ani mated and epigrammatic his style, so con stant his flow of humor, that his opinions are veritable oases in the chancery reports. These sentences are taken at random: ''Men may be honest without being lawyers, and there are doings from which instinct 1 Some of his notable admiralty cases are : The Char kieh, 4 Aclm. & Ecc. 59; The Tentonia, 3 do. 394; The Halley, 2 do. 3; The Circassian; The Constitution; The Parlement Belge. 5 P. D. 197; The City of Mecca. 5 do. 28; The Macleod, 5 do. 254; R. v. Keyn, 2 Ex. D. 63. In probate and matrimonial affairs see Cheese v. Lovejoy. 2 P. D. 25; Rottomayer p. De Barros, 49 L- J- Pi; Baker v. Baker, 5 P. D. 142. His most remarkable ecclesiastical judgment is Martin v. Mackonochie, 2 Adm. & Ecc. Others of importance are the well known cases of Elphinstone v. Purchas, Sheppard i>. Bennett. Boyd v. Phillipotts, Jenkins P. Cook, and the Colenso case.