15
refer
The Chief Justice observes " I would
Will 4.0.39. The to the acts of 2 Will. 4. C. 3. uniformity of Procces act (amended by 3
and 4. Will. 4. C. b7) and 3 and 4 Will. 4. 0.42 _ The Law amendment Act for
<<
the purpose of shewing that the Imperial_ parliament sometimes
matters
islates on-
legislates
of practice and pleading
and pleading in the superior Courts of the Common Law in England. The former statute is replete
and
with the most practical knactments
d gives to the Judges of those fourts the power of making such further rules and they shall think necessary for the act into exceution. The
Orders as
carrying
latter Statute demonstrates the absolute
necessity that
may
exist of an authority from Parliament to the Judges of the superion
fourts to make rules and orders in particular caces. That statute recites that doubts
might
$18
might arise, (very serious doubts had arisen) as to the power of those Judges
to make
alterations in the forms of pleading without. the authority of
Parliament, and then
grants the requisite authority, but not without
a
strong opposition to the power of parliament-
The being thus delegated..
was
matter however
compromised by making it incumbent on the Judges to lay before. Parliament such Rules and orders as they might prame
which they
after
were to have the same
free as if enacted- by Parliament !
The foregoing
seems to shew that
although the clauses now under consideration might, pursuant to the power given by the 24th section of the present= Ordinance, have formed the subject of a rule offoust as being of a practical nature, still- they were perhaps not very much out of place. I should indeed_ have much preferred
embodying