Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 24.pdf/276

 English Judicial Character dred years that an Englishman might not feel assured, in approaching a court of justice, that no consideration in the mind of the court would outweigh the desire to reach a right judgment. Per haps the mere fact that the judges kept themselves honest does not merit praise, but even in England the same high stand ard has not always been maintained. A reminder of a time when less creditable conditions existed is found in the words quaintly spoken of Sir Randolf Crewe, that Chief Justice of the King's Bench who forfeited his office rather than sanc tion the illegal practices of Charles the First in obtaining supplies of money. Contrasting his independent conduct with that of the corrupt judges who yielded to the King's wishes, Hollis, a member of Parliament, finely said: "He kept his innocency when others let theirs go ... which raises his merit to a higher pitch. For to be honest when everybody is honest, when honesty is in fashion and is trump, as I may say, is nothing so meritorious; but to stand alone in the breach — to own honesty when others dare not do it, cannot be sufficiently applauded, nor sufficiently rewarded." It is an honorable record, the making of which has counted much in the crea tion of the English national character and in the strength and permanence of the English government. And with those qualities in individual judges that have most fixed attention now in mind, from the rapid summary that has been

245

made, the typical judicial character may be builded. More than one noteworthy trait existed in all, in some nearly all were combined. But selecting some quality that was marked in each, and choosing only from the best that Eng land's proud record of judicial history gives, the qualifications might be these: The purity of motive and exalted vir tue of Hale; the independence of Coke; the rugged strength and common sense of Holt; the great professional learning of Eldon and of Campbell; the human ity, the love of truth of Camden; the majesty of presence and authority of Ellenborough, without his tendency sometimes to pervert these gifts; the mental acuteness and power of expres sion of Sugden and of Westbury; the open mind, the courtesy of manner, the remarkable memory, the readiness to hear argument of Lyndhurst; the cease less industry of Cottenham; the selfcommand, the close but restrained atten tion to argument of Lord Cairns; the discipline, in a wide sense, maintained by Tenterden; Lord Nottingham's ha tred of a delayed cause; the innate judi cial faculty of Hardwicke and of Mans field, as well as their general culture and enlightened attitude toward their pro fession; the integrity, the desire to do justice, the courageous firmness in the discharge of duty that marked them all. Such a standard might not be exacted, but it is one to be contemplated and striven for.