★ Keep up to date with the latest news - subscribe to the Transcribe Bentham newsletter; Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
In the first place it was a novelty a for which the consequences would contribute fact that the
Chancellor should sit in the Court not as an original
Judge – but as a judge of appeal. He understood that –
"with a very few exceptions" (N.B. Not certain as to those
original causes – further exceptions and further directions – motions
– petitions – pleas and demurrers were to be decided
by the two other judges – and that when parties
were not satisfied with their decisions they were
to have the right of appealing to the Chancellor. – In his
opinion this plan would in the end destroy the
whole system of equity founded on the rules
and principles laid down by Lords Nottingham –
Talbot – and Hardwicke – a system peculiar to
this country and forming the law of the
Court of Chancery – a system depending in a great measure for the preservation
of its uniformity and consistency upon
its administration made it have by one the
same judge – who by having his mind constantly
exercised upon the several parties upon all
its branches would readily, when necessary, bring
the whole doctrines of the Court to bear upon any
particular case. If this committee were granted
he thought he could shew that it to be
absolutely essential to the due administration of
justice in that Court "that the Judge
should be in the daily habit of doing
business in it – that it was a novelty incompatible
with its constitution to make the
Chancellor a mere Judge of Appeal – that this
innovation would be undermine the system
Identifier: | JB/149/218/003 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 149.
|
|||
---|---|---|---|
1825 |
|||
149 |
constitutional code |
||
218 |
|||
003 |
on the report of the commission for enquiring into the state of the court of chancery |
||
copy/fair copy sheet |
4 |
||
recto |
c1 / / / |
||
[[watermarks::[fleur de lys motif]]] |
|||
50072 |
|||