Marked "B!
138
mistaken, I cannot but think it is the safest course for
us to decline doing now, what it does not appear that
this Court has ever done before." (Jefferson v. Eishop of
Turhan, * Ecs, & Puli. 188.)
This again 1 submit is the case under consideration. See now,
per Stirling, J., So recently as in 1890: –
"It is much better to adhere to what has been the practice
in the Chambers of both divisions of the Court than that
a single Judge should attempt to set up what he considers
a better practice". (Liverpool and Manchester Aerated
Bread Company v. Birth, b.d.80 Ch. D. 154.)
And finally by Lord Chief Justice Mansfield again, one of the
most accomplished Judges that the world has ever seen:-
"I will not, without any authority, suffer the constant
practice of this Court for thirty years to be broken
through." (Suppt. 155.)
15.
Comment upon all this would be superfluous and in my
opinion take up unnecessary time.
18. No Judge as I have shown has the right of himself to alter
the practice of the Court. I have frequently been put about
since Mr. Sercombe Smith has been on the bench, as the deposito-
ry of the practice of the Court, to know really whether practice
as we understand the term is really known in this Colony. With-
out any disparagement in such matters, I am frequently reminded
of the saying in regard to the "Chancellor's Foot". fhus on
several occasions i have thought it right to approach the late
Chief Justice, Sir John Garrington, on the subject. Unce, in-
deed, I wrote him a minute so as to have something on record,
which minute I have now found, and attach, but this respected
Judge thought it best not to interfere.
14. Now with regard to paragraph 12 of the Puisne Judge's
letter
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.