industry. What I wish to suggest is, that all which can be done ought to be done for the simplification of the law, and for the promotion of its expression in writing, to encourage and facilitate codification." (Vol. ii. p. 46.)

This is excellent, nor can we possibly omit the conclusion:

"To trouble your Lordships no further on this occasion, I take the liberty of stating, that in my humble judgment all that is desirable to be done with reference to the improvement not only of the Local Courts and of all the other Courts, but of the Law itself, cannot be done without the appointment, under some appropriate name, of a MINISTER OF JUSTICE, whose duty while in office would be to attend principally if not exclusively to this most important of all subjects." (Vol. ii. p. 47.)

All this is highly valuable, and we have great pleasure in adding Lord Langdale's authority in furtherance of these reforms for which we have so long contended. Mr. Hardy thus fairly enough alludes to Lord Langdale's appearance in the House of Lords, in which he

"could hardly be said to shine. He was no debater, nor what is commonly called an eloquent speaker. There was no passion in his declamation, no animation in his gestures, and little emphasis in his tones; and yet there was no monotony. His manner was collected and dignified; but occasionally his eye ranged rapidly about him as though he would read in the faces of his listeners the effect he was producing. His arguments were calm, clear, and deliberate, and seemed to have been written and studied, rather than an effusion warm from his brain. He was always temperate and chaste in his expressions; ridicule and sarcasm were never employed by him, as he thought both beneath the dignity of a judge (?) He used neither ornament nor picturesque illustrations to assist his statement. He held his imagination under the severest control, and trusted to the simplicity and lucid arrangement of his facts to prove the effect he desired; nor did he ever allow party feeling or politics to influence his choice of words; but when he spoke of the delay in the administration of justice-subjects in which his whole soul seemed wrapped-then his cheek flushed, and he kindled into an earnestness of expression unusual for him to exhibit." (Vol. ii. p. 47.)

Lord Langdale, although not a very distinguished Judge, was highly painstaking, and in this capacity praiseworthy. When his business was at a standstill

"he would write to the Lord Chancellor to report the fact, offering to fill up his vacant time by undertaking any other official duty the Chancellor might think fit to put upon him on the occasion." (Vol. ii. p. 54.)

He was disposed to work as a Master:

"The Master of the Rolls is himself chief of the Masters; and Lord Langdale considered there was no difficulty in his taking upon himself the functions of a Master if he had leisure so to do.' (Vol. ii. p. 55.)

Mr. Hardy, in a subsequent page (p. 100.), mentions, that the late Master of the Rolls always expressed his willingness to act as a Judge-Master, even before the Act of last Session was brought in.

More doubtful, we think, was his conduct when he refused to stop a cause when one of the leaders in his Court was called out of Court and informed of the death of his mother. The reason savoured to our minds of what is best known as priggishness, from which he certainly was not free:

"That gentleman,' he said, 'is one of my most extreme friends, and I sympathize sincerely with him in his affliction ; but as I could not stop the progress of public business if the junior concerned in the cause had met with a similar bereavement, I should hold it unjust to stop it because the misfortune occurred to a leader who is my intimate friend."" (Vol. ii. p. 56.)

Lord Langdale disapproved of the closing of all the Courts in the Long Vacation: he thought it "would be better to have a relay of Judges and Counsel, so that the Court might be always sitting." (Vol. ii. p. 61.) And on one occasion he exclaimed, with considerable indignation, "The Court is now about to close for a quarter of a year; it is a scandalous shame; the door of justice never should be closed."

On the occasion of the Attorney-General v. the Ironmongers Company, the question was discussed as to how far that officer could hold a brief for any person but the relator;

and he remarks, that "the reports had not done justice to the Attorney-General (Sir John Campbell), who behaved so well, so gracefully we might say, on the occasion, and who argued the case with such ingenuity and great talent. There is," he said, "no doubt that Campbell, Pemberton, and Follett, are by far, very far, the first men at the Bar." (Vol. ii. p. 64.)

Altogether his judicial conduct and history are the most satisfactory part of the life of Lord Langdale. The following anecdote shows the remarkable cowardice of the legislator, and Mr. Hardy gives it as if creditable to his hero:

Speaking on another occasion of the proposed reforms in the offices of the Court of Chancery, he said, 'I am determined not to put myself forward as the attacking party; but I am willing to march side by side with the Chancellor: I will not take upon myself the odium of the assault, and leave the Chancellor the grace.'" (Vol. ii. p. 94.)

What great or useful reform in the law, we would ask,— nay, what noble or generous action,-was ever accomplished in this spirit?

Mr. Hardy devotes considerable space to the successful exertions of Lord Langdale to establish and complete a Record Office, perhaps the most valuable labour of his life, and in this we think he is entitled to the praise of which his biographer is so lavish. His Lordship was also a worthy trustee of the British Museum.

We now come to an important subject, as to which Lord Langdale is entitled to, if not to blame, to very small merit. We allude to the Registration Commission, over which he presided. This was issued in February, 1847, and Mr. Hardy

says,

"As in everything he undertook, Lord Langdale was indefatigable in his attention to the subject." (Vol. ii. p. 222.)

But the result of this Commission, as stated in the next page, negatives this eulogy:

"His labours resulted in the presentation of a voluminous and learned Report to Her Majesty on the labours of the Commission

relating to Registration; but he was prepared to enter upon the other branch of the subject referred to the Commission, when illness and death overtook him." (Vol. ii. p. 223.)

But how was it that in the four years that were spared to him he did not ever introduce a Registration Bill, and that at the close of the year 1852 we are still inquiring after this great reform? Mr. Hardy surely indulges in a sneer when he closes this chapter with the observation that "the surviving Commissioners are unhappy in having lost a colleague so admirably qualified to assist their labours, and to bring them to a satisfactory conclusion!" We may observe that the first thing the Commissioners should have done was to apply for an extension of the terms of their commission, as the Chancery Commissioners did, which would have been granted to them as of course. This was immediately pointed out at the time in these pages', and is admitted by the Commissioners in their Report.2

But we pass on to the crowning act of Lord Langdale's political cowardice.

In 1849 Lord Cottenham fell ill, and the business of the

Great Seal got into arrear. It was rumoured that Lord Langdale had been offered the Great Seal, and had refused it, upon which Lord Lyndhurst wrote to him the following letter:

"MY DEAR LANGDALE, -I am told that nothing will induce you to accept the Great Seal: I do not believe it. You are not a man to prefer your ease and private interest to that of the public. There is no person as Chancellor so well calculated to complete the reforms of the Court, every day becoming more necessary and urgent, as yourself. There is no object of more importance to the public welfare, or which, when accomplished, will redound more

1 See 6 L. R. p. 163.

2 Alluding to Judicial Registration, on which evidence was given before the Commissioners, the Report says: "We have not thought ourselves warranted by the terms of the Commission in entering into the consideration of the very extensive changes in the law, by which such a system of registration must obviously be preceded." Why, then, was not an extension of these terms applied for, and the question set at rest?

to the credit and honour of him by whom this great good shall be effected. Consider this well, and weigh it in all its bearings.

"Your sincere friend,

"(Blind as a mole),

LYNDHURST."

To this noble invitation, from a political opponent, so well and so kindly expressed, Lord Langdale uttered (April, 1850,) an uncertain sound.”

66

"I think,' he said, 'there is more reason than ever for vigorous and careful reforms in Chancery, especially as the desire for change grows predominant, and seems to become very rash; it will ultimately prevail, and if not carefully guided, will very likely, with the evils sweep away many of the most important advantages which the Court has hitherto secured to the country. This subject will not bear neglect, but I do not see how that which is required to be done can be done by any Chancellor, or by any one whose mind is stretched to its utmost power of useful exertion by the performance of his ordinary duties. I am, indeed, not less convinced than I was in 1836, that a change in the office of Chancellor is absolutely necessary, not only for the complete and satisfactory reform of the Court of Chancery, but generally for the reform of the law, and for the improvement of our mode and system of legislation; and after much reflection I have come to the conclusion, that it would require the greatest possible self-delusion to induce any man to accept the office of Chancellor upon the notion that he could in that character accomplish the work which is now required."" (Vol. ii. p. 245.)

On this we would ask how, and in what character, could such a reform be accomplished? We should have thought that the holder of the Great Seal, with a willing Government to back him, and two preceding Chancellors to support him, and no opponents at all that we can make out, might have done any thing that was right in the matter; but if Lord Langdale preferred bringing the measure forward in the character of Master of the Rolls, separate from all political parties, and independent of them all, he was already in a position so to do. What we complain of is, that he would neither take the Great Seal and accomplish this great work, nor bring it forward as Master of the Rolls, which office was