The Sun.
London, England, 1836-02-25 00:00:00

Lords called in rotation ,to assist in appeal cases,- or the
suitors, whose interests shOuld be justly and dispassionately
considered ?

An efficient appellant court should be, therefore, estab-
lished for the purpose of insuring a right decision, and of
commanding confidence in that decision, with reference to
the suitor,
.the public, and the legal profession. Lord
• Brougham did not deem it indispensable that there should
be any separate and exclusive tribunal of Judges appointed
for the express purpose of deciding appeals, but merely a due
admixture of various Judges with those whose decisions were
appealed against—thus proceeding on a system analogous
to the Courts of Common Law. Since his Lordship con-'
_strutted the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council upon
this principle, he proposed a similar change for the supreme
appellant jurisdiction. Lord Brougham also proposed giv-
ing to the House of Lords the power of calling for the ser-
vices of Judges in Equity, and directing any case wherein
there might be an appeal, to be tried by a Judicial Com-
mittee, which would publicly adjudicate and report to the
Lords, who would pronounce their judgment in open Court.
Besides, was not such Committee of the House of Lords to
consist of four Judges, presided over by the actual or late
Lord Chancellor, or the actual or late Chief Justice of
the King's Bench or Common Pleas ? Though such alte-
rations were suggested in the supreme appellant jurisdiction,
yet does not the British public well remember, that the ne-
cessity for such change did not arise from the mode in which
judicial business was adjudicated in the Court of Chan-
cery, or the House of Lords, by Lord Chancellor Brougham,
who never suffered any arrears in either of these important
departments ?

Since no arrears existed for some time in the Court of
Chancery, Lord Brougham could not therefore proceed
with his Bill for separating the judicial and political func-
tions of the Lord Chancellor, whose numerous and conflict-
ing duties must be. now efficiently separated. Though
Lord Brougham despatched the business peculiarly apper-
taining to him as Lord Chancellor, yet the arrears in the
Equity Courts have since increased to an alarming extent.
Few, if any, men possess the clear judicial mind of Lord
Brougham, for satisfactorily discharging all the duties which
devolve upfn the Court of Chancery, as well as presiding
over the House of Lords on all fitting occasions, together
with acquitting the multiplicity of other functions apper-
taining to the office of Lord Chancellor. But is it not
impolitic that the highest Judge in civil matters should be
a Minister of State, removable at the pleasure of the Crown ?
Would it not be prudent, if the noble, personage usually
entrusted with the Great Seal were limited to perform the
political duties incident to this high office, as adviser of the
Crown and Speaker in the House of Lords, together with the
judicial functions in that appellate jurisdiction? Since Par-
liament, at the suggestion of Lord Brougham, reformed the
Privy Council tribunal, should not the Lord Chancellor be
similarly placed as the other Judges who preside in that
useful and efficient Court ? And, in the Court of Chan-
cery, should not a Chief Judge be appointed, with a com-
mission irremovable quaindiu bene se gesserit, like the Com-
mon Law Judges, whose independence of the Crown has
been long regarded the best safeguard and security of our
rights and liberties ?
Though Law Reform, Sir, may be no' deemed com-
paratively easy, yet when Lord Brougham originated and
effected various prudent legal improvements, were not num•
berless obstacles encountered from a horror of any change
in the law, as well as the opposition of individuals and
classes of men who had an interest in the perpetuation of
certain abuses ? Notwithstanding such obstacles, however,
has not this philanthropic personage, with great skill, talent,
and experience, rendered the transfer of property more simple
and economical, the expenses of litigation trivial and in-
considerable, besides the adjudication of differences far more
expeditious ? Instead of an equity suit enduring for some
generations, did not Lord Brougham determine all arrears,
and every cause introduced during the period of his presid-
ing in the Court of Chancery, thereby demonstrating him-
self as the ablest judicial functionary that ever filled the
high station of Lord Chancellor ? Since this constant dis-
charge of-legislative and judicial duties pre-eminently distin-
guished Lord Brougham's official career, ought not his equally
anxious determination to eradicate every principle injurious
to the British nation, but especially detrimental to the ad-
ministration of justice, influence each disinterested and
enlightened individual to co-operate in promoting Lord
Brougham's useful, salutary, and patriotic Law Reforms ?
I remain, &c.
Chancery-lane, Feb. 22, 1836,

MENTOR.