minster, the party applying for a special jury being required to pay the fee for striking such jury, being not more than one guinea to each special juror for such service, except in causes where a view was had. WELSH Judges were empowered to appoint persons to take affidavits concerning proceedings in their circuit, but no Commissioner authorized to take affidavits could do so during the time for holding the Great Sessions. The Justices of Great Sessions might authorize any person to take recognizances of bail. Other matters relating to procedure are dealt with in this Act, which concluded by ordering that in all cases where penalties were fixed by any statutes, and which were directed to be recovered in the Courts at Westminster, they might be recovered in the Courts of Great Sessions.

A.D. 1793.—An Act in 1793 (33 GEORGE 3, c. 68) further dealt with and remedied certain inconveniences which were found to exist in proceedings in the Courts of Great Sessions and in the County Courts of WALES. In cases where judgments had been obtained in the Courts of Great Sessions, and the persons or effects could not be found within the jurisdiction of those Courts, any Court at Westminster might issue execution. Clauses in the Act of 1542 relating to the Sheriff's County or Hundred Courts were repealed.

A.D. 1809.-By 49 GEORGE 3, c. 127, s. 5, in 1809, a further augmentation of four hundred pounds as salary was made to the Chief Justice of Chester, to the Second Justice of Chester, and to each of the Justices of the Great Sessions for the Counties of WALES.

A.D. 1812.-By the Act (52 GEORGE 3, c. 155), in 1812, which applied to England and WALES, certain statutes relating to religious worship and assemblies and persons teaching or preaching therein were repealed, and persons affected thereby could claim exemption upon producing a certificate of having made and taken certain oaths and declarations required by this Act. By section 10, the penalty for producing any false certificate was fixed at

£50, which penalty could be recovered in WALES at the Courts of Great Sessions.

A.D. 1824. The business of the Courts of Great Sessions had greatly increased before 1824, and it was found from experience that suitors experienced many inconveniences from the delays occasioned by the want of powers in the WELSH Judges to make alterations in the practice, in order to assimilate the procedure to the Courts in England. Therefore an Act (5 GEORGE 4, c. 106) was passed in that year enlarging and extending the powers of the Judges in the several Courts of Great Sessions in WALES and amending the laws relating to the same. Until the abolition of these Courts, the uniform course of practice which was followed was regulated mainly in accordance with this Act, and such of the preceding Acts as were applicable. It is not necessary to refer here to all its provisions, but some may be noticed. Before this Act, whenever a suit was commenced in any WELSH county every stage of the legal proceedings had to be followed in that county; and all further proceedings, whenever the Sessions for such county ended, were suspended until the ensuing Sessions. By the 11th section the WELSH Judges were empowered, when Courts were sitting in any county, to make rules and orders in suits depending in the other counties. By the 12th section, when the Courts were not sitting in WALES, the WELSH Judges were authorized, if necessary, to make orders in London or other places outside the jurisdiction. By the 13th section, writs could be issued from one WELSH county to another. By the 19th section, the Act of 1773 relating to the trial of WELSH causes at the Assizes in the next English county was repealed, and in lieu thereof it was provided that if an action were brought wherein the plaintiff did not recover £50 he was to be non-suited and the defendant was to recover costs against the plaintiff, unless the Judge certified that there was a title to the land in question, or that the case was proper to be tried in such English county. The intention

of this clause was to prevent the parties from resorting to the English Courts in actions under £50, thereby materially increasing the business of the Great Sessions. By the 29th section, the qualifications of jurymen of the Courts of Great Sessions were fixed to be an estate of freehold or copyhold of £8 yearly value or upwards, or any life interest or estate for the term of ninety-nine years of the yearly value of £15.

THE WELSH JUDICATURE.

A.D. 1830.-On July 23, 1830, an Act (I WILLIAM 4, c. 70) was passed to put an end to the separate jurisdiction for the Principality of WALES, and to make more effectual provision for the administration of Justice in England and WALES.

As this Act abolished the last vestiges of distinction in legal procedure between England and WALES, it is proposed to summarize the leading characteristics of a system of jurisprudence which had lasted in the Dominion of WALES for three centuries. It was in many respects superior to that prevailing in England, besides being familiar to the WELSH people, and adapted by long use to their habits and

customs.

It was brought into permanent existence, as already stated, by the Act of HENRY the Eighth, in 1542, promulgated upon the basis of reports made by Commissioners after inquiries on the spot, and it was too favourably said by Barrington "to contain a most complete code of regulations for the administration of justice, framed with such precision and accuracy that no one clause of it hath ever yet occasioned a doubt or required an explanation." It received the approval of two of the greatest of English jurists, Lord Coke and Lord Bacon. Coke refers to the WELSH Courts as the "excellent, venerable variety of seats and courts of justice, with their proper jurisdictions, according to the laws of England-the golden metwand, whereby all men's

causes are fully and evenly measured"; and it was observed by Lord Bacon that they were founded by an Act that had required no further explanation!

But in the early part of the nineteenth century, when public attention was given to the very necessary reforms that were demanded in the technical absurdities and vexatious requirements of the English laws, the special judicature of WALES was (probably quite unnecessarily) included in the scope of the proposed innovations.

In 1780, Burke had in his "plan for the better security of the Independence of Parliament, and the economical reformation of the civil and other establishments" included a Bill "for the more perfectly uniting to the Crown the Principality of WALES and the County Palatine of Chester and for the more commodious administration of justice within the same." He said, in the House of Commons, on December 18, 1780, that he thought that the addition of a judge to each of the English Courts at Westminster would be sufficient for WALES, but his original plan was to abolish five out of the eight WELSH judgeships which existed, and to throw the counties into districts. His opposition to the WELSH judicature was on account of expense, and not upon general grounds. In 1798, a Select Committee of the House of Commons on finance in Courts of Justice recommended that the four Circuits in WALES should be amalgamated.

Another Select Committee was appointed by the House of Commons to examine into the administration of Justice in WALES. This Committee made an interim report in 1817, and in 1820 further evidence was submitted by it, without any report being presented. In 1821 they made a final report. This was not adopted, but the Act of 1824 (which has already been noticed), without disturbing the Courts, established a uniform course of procedure. After a long and heated controversy and many debates in both Houses of Parliament, the statute of 1830 was passed, terminating the authority and jurisdiction of the Courts of Great Sessions,

WALES had enjoyed its own separate judicature, with its own technical machinery, for the most part independent of the London Courts. Writs were issued, actions commenced and decided without any reference to the Courts at Westminster.

The four WELSH circuits in 1817 contained altogether, exclusive of the County of Chester, a population of 611,788 persons. For these circuits, eight paid judges were required, but they had no right to any pension on retirement. The salary of the Chief Justice of Chester, at the end of the history of the Courts of Great Sessions, was £1,630 per annum ; the second judge at Chester received £1,250 per annum, and the remaining WELSH Judges were paid £1,150 per annum respectively, and were entitled also to other fees. They were eligible to sit in the House of Commons, and to hold office under Government during the pleasure of the Crown. Lord John Russell complained in the House of Commons in 1820 that, as the WELSH Judges were permitted to sit in that assembly, their posts were looked upon as retainers or rewards for their party support. It was objected against them that they used their abundant leisure to practise at the English Bar, and that as twelve judges were enough for England, eight were too many for WALES. Between 1542 and 1830, 217 Judges of the WELSH Circuits had been appointed, out of which number only thirty were natives of WALES and Monmouthshire. It was also alleged that sometimes hypothetical cases from WALES, stated under feigned names, were submitted for opinion to the WELSH Judges when acting as counsel in England, but the answer made to this allegation was that they refused to give their opinion unless they received an absolute assurance that the case did not arise within their jurisdiction. It was also complained that the WELSH Judges were sometimes oddly selected, and that it did not add to the legal business to have the same Judge sitting for a great number of years in the same courts. Burke was very severe in his criticism of the