taking the appeals during the last two months of the session, 22 were heard and decided. In 1851, under Lord Truro, 20 were heard, and 9 decided. In 1852, under Lord Truro till February, and after that under Lord St. Leonard's, 35 were heard, and 33, that is all heard by the latter, were decided.

We have, in making this statement of numbers, incidentally mentioned the only two instances of Lord Eldon receiving any additional aid to that which each of his predecessors had in performing the duties of his office. But it is fit that we now show how greatly in the time of his successors, there has been an increase in the force of the Court, we may say of the Courts, because whatever relieves the Court of Chancery operates an almost equal relief to the Lords, from the circumstance of the same Judge presiding in both. It is quite necessary, in common fairness to Lord Eldon, that this increase should be always borne in mind when we are comparing his proceedings with theirs.

Before the year 1813, and during the first eleven years that he held the Great Seal, there were nominally two superior Judges in the Court of Chancery besides the inferior Judges, the Masters; but in reality, those two were rather fractional than integers: for beside the interference of his political duties on the part of the Chancellor, the Master of the Rolls sat only a few hours in the evening, except during one week after each term. He sat one and sometimes two days a week in the Privy Council. We may reckon these two Judges, as far as Chancery was concerned, equal to one and a half. Then came the Vice-Chancellor's appointment in 1813, and in passing, as we are seeking to do Lord Eldon justice, we may remark on the charges so frequently and so falsely made against him of pecuniary meanness, that half the Vice-Chancellor's salary was by his bill deducted from that of the Chancellor. This addition of one Judge made a very considerable difference in the judicial force; it was thus increased in the proportion of three to five. It remained at this point during the whole of Lord Eldon's incumbency. But soon after he quitted office, a new arrangement was made by which the Master of the Rolls sat in the morning; and in 1832,

bankruptcy was almost entirely removed from the Chancellor's jurisdiction. It used in Lord Eldon's time to occupy nine or ten weeks, or about a fourth of the judicial year. This creation of the Bankruptcy Court and the change at the Rolls may be estimated as having, with the creation of the Vicet Chancellor, raised the judicial force in the proportion of three

to seven.

But then came the measure of 1841, when two ViceChancellors were added, raising the force to eleven; and last of all came the new Judges of appeal in Chancery, the Lords Justices, in whom are vested all the powers of the Chancellor without any exception when sitting together, and the power besides of sitting separately, so that as compared with the time of Lord Eldon's predecessors and with the first eleven years of his own incumbency, the judicial force of the Courhas increased from three to fifteen-it has been augmented five-fold. It is true that the arrangement by which Lord Gifford presided for two sessions in the House of Lords, gave Lord Eldon great relief during those years; but it is equally true that in all the sessions after 1834, his successors had the like relief from the constant attendance of ex-Chancellors, who not only sat with the Chancellor, but took appeals on the days when he did not leave his own Court. The result, therefore, of the whole comparative view is, that ever since Lord Eldon retired, it has become a much easier task to dispose of the business, whether in the Lords or the Court of Chancery, than it was at any period of his long Chancellorship.

That the business has increased at least in Chancery, there can be no doubt. But has it increased in the same proportion with the judicial power added to the Court? Has it increased five-fold, or anything like five-fold? We believe no one will maintain such a proposition. Nor is it only to do Lord Eldon justice that this question is now asked. Another and a practical purpose may be served by the inquiry, to which we solicit the attention of the profession. The abolition of the Master's office has directed the minds of some to the possibility of more Vice-Chancellors being required. Let us hope that before any such conclusion is come to, the

most careful consideration will be given to the question which we have propounded; that the distinction will be marked between a permanent, and what is in all probability only a temporary increase of Equity business; and that until every means shall have been adopted by which the great judicial force now in the Court can be most effectually used, no further addition to it will be thought of.

ART. XI.-CHANCERY REFORM MEASURES.

1. An Act to abolish the Office of Master in Ordinary of the High Court of Chancery, and to make Provision for the more speedy and efficient Dispatch of Business in the said Court (15 & 16 Vict. c. 80.).

2. An Act to amend the Practice and Course of Proceeding in the High Court of Chancery (15 & 16 Vict. c. 86.).

3. An Act for the Relief of the Suitors in the High Court of Chancery (15 & 16 Vict. c. 87.).

4. General Orders and Rules of the High Court of Chancery; issued by the Lord High Chancellor, August 7th, 1852.

AT length the country is presented with a series of measures, which exhibit the characteristics of sound and real reform, and bid fair to remedy some of the most crying evils attendant upon the course of justice in the High Court of Chancery. The Acts of the last Session, coupled with the General Orders since promulgated by the Lord Chancellor, with the assistance of the Judges1, are a substantial instalment towards the liquidation of that great debt, which has so long been owing to the country from its lawyers and states

The painful intelligence was received within ten days after the date of these orders, that one of the most honoured names by which they are signed and sanctioned was removed from the scene of his early success and usefulness, by a sudden and untimely death. Sir James Parker's short career as a ViceChancellor was sufficient to distinguish him as a most able Judge, whose future elevation to the highest seat in Westminster Hall was contemplated by the Profession as a possibility which would have admirably subserved the public.

men; and if these measures are carried into operation in the same spirit in which they appear to have been conceived, it is not too late, even for the Court of Chancery, to acquire a good name and repute among the public establishments of

the land.

It is remarkable, that an institution so useful and blameless in its origin, and rendered indispensable in its functions by the deficiencies of the Common Law, should, for want of timely interference, have been suffered by the country to degenerate into a curse and a byeword, and to foil every scheme heretofore propounded for its reformation. It needed no reports of the case of Jarndyce v. Jarndyce from the lively pen of Dickens the younger (for Chancery has already had its elder Dickens) to rouse the public mind to a pitch of determination, which rendered all further trifling on such a subject inadmissible.

The temper of the late House of Commons was, in this respect, an undoubted reflection of the national feeling; and experienced lawyers, who enjoyed seats in that Assembly, were thoroughly convinced that another Jacob Omnium might have induced the House, by a well-timed petition, to repeat the precedent of the Palace Court, and to effect a revolution, under which half the Bar of England might have awoke some morning to the discovery, that by a Parliamentary vote of the previous night, their occupation was extinguished, and the Court of Chancery numbered with the Star Chamber and the Court of High Commissioners. vast an amount of property is involved in Chancery litigation or administration, and so many persons are interested in the results, that the matter became a topic of popular agitation, which it was absolutely necessary to appease.

So

With this state of public feeling accompanying their labours, the Commissioners appointed by the Crown to ininterests. His sound judgment, logical method, and extensive legal acquirements, are said to have quickly recommended him, when at the bar, to the favourable notice of Lord Chancellor Truro, who formed the resolution, which he afterwards so handsomely fulfilled, without the smallest regard to political considerations, of raising him to the Bench on the earliest opportunity. The profession and the public have equal occasion to deplore the loss of so valuable a judge, and so excellent a man.

quire into the practice and constitution of the Court, entered upon their duties. In our opinion the original Commissioners, who were all lawyers, were well selected; and the subsequent addition of two non-professional members — Sir James Graham and Mr. Henley was well calculated to increase public confidence in their deliberations and resolutions. Their Report was presented to the Crown at the beginning of the present year, and was immediately laid before the two Houses of Parliament. Bills, embodying the resolutions of the Commissioners, were likewise in progress. But the political changes, to which the last Session gave birth, had well nigh postponed the consideration of Chancery Reforms to a more convenient season. Many of the suggestions of the Commissioners were reputed to be distasteful to the new Lord Chancellor, in whose department the consideration of these measures, and the charge or carriage of the bills for carrying them into execution, necessarily lay. The abolition of the Masters was understood to be peculiarly obnoxious to His Lordship; and if the temper of the nation had not been thoroughly manifest at the time in question, excuses might readily have been found, amidst the pressing avocations of a new and unsettled Ministry, for shelving the whole subject of Chancery Reform. The demands, however, of the country were listened to by the Government: and if we except the institution of the County Courts, the Act which stands first in the list prefixed to the present Article, is probably the greatest triumph yet achieved by Law Reformers. Every attempt to improve the Masters' Offices had utterly failed.

One of the most experienced of the Masters themselves long since felt bound to declare, that his Office was utterly incapable of improvement, and that abolition was the only rational amendment of the system. This has now been carried into effect; and the Judge-Master is the substituted functionary, according to the principle so long advocated in this Review. In other words, the Master of the Rolls and the Vice-Chancellors are to carry their own decrees into execution, so far as such labours have hitherto been thrown upon the Masters, and are to sit at Chambers with a staff of