Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 14.pdf/104

 A Century of English Judicature. topic of general interest, may be taken from his opinion in the case of the Queen v. Jack son, (1891) 1 Q. B. 678, where a wife who had left her husband's house was forcibly brought back by her husband, who claimed the right to restrain her there. "I confess," says Lord Halsbury, in the course of his opinion, "that some of the propositions which have been referred to during the ar gument are such as I should be reluctant to suppose ever to have been the law of Eng land. More than a century ago it was boldly contended that slavery existed in England; but if any one were to set up such a conten tion now it would be regarded as ridiculous. In the same way, such quaint and absurd dicta as are to be found in the books as to the right of a husband over his wife in re spect of personal chastisement are not, I think, now capable of being cited as authori ties in a- court of justice in this or any civil ized country. It is important to bear this in mind, for many of the statements, which have been relied upon, of a more moderate character and less outrageous to common feelings of humanity, are bound up with these ancient dicta to which I refer. The only justification, as it appears to me, for such expressions as are found in some of the old books is that afforded by the free trans lation given to them by Hale, C. J., who suggests that 'castigatio' may be taken to mean admonition merely; whether the word will bear that translation in these passages I cannot say; but I am glad that some one, even at that early period, thought it incon sistent with the rights of free human crea tures that such a power of personal chastise ment of the wife should exist."1 1 Some of the best specimens of his powers are : Allen v. Flood (1898), A. C. I; Monson v. Madam Tassaud, 63 L. J., Q. B. 454; R. v. Jackson, 64 L. T. 679; Derry v. Teek, 14 A. C. 337; Membery v. Great Western Ry., 14 A. C. 179; Great Western Ry. v. Bunch, 13 A. C. 31; Ixmdon, etc., Ry. v. Truman, 11 A. C. 45; Adam v. Newbigging, 13 A. C. 308; Macdougall v. Knight, 60 L. T. 762; Cox v. Halles, 63 L. T. 679 : Bank of Kngland v. Vagliano (1891), A. C. 107; London Joint Stock Bank v. Simmons (1892), A. C. 201; Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor, A. C. 25; Smith v. Baker (1891), A. C. 531; Russell v. Russell (1897), A. C. 395.

75

THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL. By the Judicature act of 1876 provision was made for the ultimate substitution of the two Lords Ordinary of Appeal for the four paid members of this Court, and thus for ultimate fusion with the House of Lords. It is made up of the Lord President, such members of the Privy Council as hold or have held high judicial office, the Lords Justices of Appeal and a limited number of Privy Councillors appointed by the Crown. In recent years several colonial judges have been added to the tribunal, thus bring ing it in closer touch with the vast empire for which it administers justice. Its jurisdiction includes colonial, Indian and ecclesiastical appeals, petitions for the prolongation of letters patent and matters specially referred to it by the Crown. The tribunal has been dominated in recent years by the vast learning and powerful intellect of Lord Watson, who sat in this court for a longer period than any permanent member, except Lord Kingsdown, by whom alone Watson's substantial contributions to impe rial law are equalled. The variety, novelty and importance of the questions coming before this tribunal lend to it an interest which transcends the merits of individual controversies. The cases specially referred by the Crown often involve questions of fundamental import ance; and, apart from the recognized right of appeal from the colonies, the Privy Coun cil may give special leave to appeal in cases of general or constitutional importance, or in criminal cases where grave in justice may have been done [Re Skin ner, 3 P. C. 451: Prince v. Gagnon, 8 App. Cas. 102; Re Dillet, 12 App. Cas.459; Levien v. Reg., 1 P. C. 536). Moreover, there is hardly any system of civilized law which does not prevail in some parts of the vast empire subject to the jurisdiction of this court,—in the West Indies the civil law of Spain, in Canada the civil law of France, in