This custom was equivalent to the law which is still retained in Scotland. By this Act, the restricted powers of bequest in WALES were abolished, and widows, children, and other relations of testators were wholly barred from any claim on his personal estate otherwise than was provided for by his will.

A.D. 1697.-By I WILLIAM and MARY, c. 27 (1688) which abolished the Court of the Marches, it was directed that Judgments and Decrees passed before June 1, 1689, were not to be repealed. As that clause had become ineffectual, because no provision had been made authorising the Courts' at Westminster and the Courts of the Great Sessions of WALES to execute or carry into effect any such judgments, an Act of 1697 (9-10 WILLIAM 3, c. 16) gave powers to the King's Chancery, the Court of Exchequer, and his Majesty's Court of Great Sessions, to issue execution upon every judgment so made, and to review, affirm, reverse, or rehear the same.

A.D. 1698.-In 1698, by 11-12 WILLIAM 3, c. 9, the provisions of two general Acts for the prevention of frivolous suits (namely, 22-23 CHARLES 2, c. 9, s. 9, and 43 ELIZABETH, c. 6) were extended to the Courts of Great Sessions for the Principality of WALES, so that in actions of trespass, theft, battery or other personal actions, where the damages were found to be under 40s., the plaintiff was not to recover more costs than the damages so found. Sheriffs in WALES were not to hold prisoners to special bail in small actions because it was oppressive and vexatious.

A.D. 1713.—In this year the Act for taking away mortuaries within the WELSH dioceses was passed (13 ANNE c. 6). Its provisions have already been noticed.1

A.D. 1715.—In the first year of GEORGE the First it was made lawful for his Majesty to grant the Crown regalities and lands in NORTH and SOUTH WALES and Cheshire to the Prince of WALES, in such manner and form as the ' P. li.

Principality of WALES and Earldom of Chester had formerly been granted to the Princes of WALES.

A.D. 1716.—An Act (3 GEORGE 1, c. 15) was passed in this year for the better regulating of the office of sheriffs. By section 20, sheriffs in WALES were directed to take the old form of oath on their accession to office, and not to adopt the new form of oath provided for sheriffs in English counties, and by section 22 they were directed to submit their accounts to the Auditor of WALES. These sections were repealed by the Sheriffs' Act of 1887. After the passing of I WILLIAM and MARY, c. 22 (1688), which took away the Court of the President and Council of the Marches of WALES, sheriffs were nominated yearly by the Justices of the Great Sessions of WALES in their respective circuits. After 1845, by the operation of 8 and 9 VICTORIA, c. 11, the WELSH sheriffs were nominated and appointed at the same time and place as the sheriffs for the English shires, and by the Sheriffs Act of 1887 (50-51 VICTORIA, c. 55, s. 31) the counties of WALES were placed on the same footing as the English counties in respect of the law relating to sheriffs and under-sheriffs.

A.D. 1721.-By 8 GEORGE I, c. 25, s. 6, Judges and officers of the Courts of Great Sessions in WALES were required to enter their judgments in the Court records, stating the time when so entered.

A.D. 1730.-Owing to the evil practices and abuses which had arisen before 1730, in the summoning of jurors, an Act (3 GEORGE 2, c. 25) was passed for the better regulation of juries. Section 9 thereof regulated the practice of summoning jurors in WALES.

A.D. 1732-3.-It was directed by section 3 of 6 GEORGE 2, c. 14, that the proceedings in the Courts of Great Sessions were to be in the English language. This followed an Act (4 GEORGE 2, c. 26, 1730-1) establishing the use of the English language in courts of justice within England and Scotland, and remedying the mischiefs arising from the proceedings in those courts being carried on in an unknown language.

In England, for many centuries, Latin had been the language of voluminous official and judicial records, and it was not dislodged from this position until 1731. French slowly supplanted Latin as the literary language of the English law, and "legal proceedings were formerly all written in Norman or Law French, and even the arguments of counsel and decisions of the Court were in the same barbarous dialect, an evident and shameful badge, it must be owned, of tyranny and foreign servitude." I The Acts of Parliament were written in French until the fourth year of the reign of HENRY the Seventh, but they were exclusively printed in English after that date. The Act of 1730-1 enacted that the records of the Courts, as well as all other legal proceedings, were to be in the English tongue and language only, and not in Latin or French, or any other tongue or language whatsoever. In the Courts of WALES it had been previously ordained by 27 HENRY 8, c. 26, s. 20, that the English language was to be used, and not the WELSH language. There is very little evidence available at present to determine whether WELSH was used in the Courts of Great Sessions, either in the oral or written proceedings, to any extent whatsoever.

The statute of 1732-3 cleared up the doubts which had arisen upon the application of the Act of 1730-1, and English was to be used thenceforth in all the Courts in WALES.

A.D. 1746.—A very important clause affecting WALES was introduced in an Act (20 GEORGE 2, c. 42) passed in 1746 to enforce rates and duties upon houses, windows, and lights. It was declared by the 3rd section that where "England" only should be mentioned in any Act of Parliament it should be deemed to comprehend WALES and the town of Berwickupon-Tweed, a town which was originally part of Scotland. Although the other portions of this Act have been repealed this clause still remains law. We find also in the 3rd section of 7-8 GEORGE 4, c. 53, passed in 1827, that in all Acts of "Blackstone's Commentaries," vol. iii. c. 21.

Parliament relating to the revenue or excise, WALES was to be included where "England" or "Great Britain" was mentioned. This was re-enacted in 1890 by 53-54 VICTORIA, c. 21, s. 38 (1).

A.D. 1758. In an Act of 1758 for the relief of debtors (32 GEORGE 2, c. 28), the 11th section provided that the Justices of the Great Sessions in WALES were to hear and determine in a summary manner complaints as to any abuses arising where gaolers, bailiffs, and others employed in the execution of legal process had in their respective offices been guilty of misconduct towards prisoners under arrest.

A.D. 1767-1772.-By the Act (8 GEORGE 3, c. 14, 1767-8) Parliament directed that the sheriffs of the several counties in WALES were to provide necessary lodging and other accommodation for the Justices of Great Sessions when on circuit, and an allowance not exceeding ten pounds for each county and for each sessions, was to be made by the Auditor, out of the land revenues of the Crown derived from the Principality of WALES, to the sheriffs for the said expenses. By a further Act (12 GEORGE 3, c. 30, 1772), owing to the considerable surplus accruing from the stamp duties appropriated for the payment of the salaries of the WELSH Judges, it was ordered that increases of salary should be made from and after April 5, 1772, to the Judges, but subject to a reasonable abatement if the surpluses did not continue and were insufficient.

A.D. 1773.-An Act (13 GEORGE 3, c. 51) was passed to discourage the practice of commencing trifling and frivolous suits in the Courts at Westminster upon causes of action arising within WALES, and of trying the said actions in the nearest adjoining English county to that part of the Dominion of WALES in which they had arisen. The origin of the Courts at Westminster assuming this jurisdiction over causes in WALES, and directing the trial in the adjoining English county, does not distinctly appear. But undoubtedly this practice had existed for a considerable time, and

was firmly established; in fact, it was said by Lord Ellenborough, C.J., in 1814 (see Goodright against Williams, 2 Maule and Selwyn's Reports, p. 274), to have been a practice which had originated in the common law, and to have been followed time out of mind. The practice was to try all issues arising in SOUTH WALES in Herefordshire, and actions from NORTH WALES in the county of Salop. It was a practice which was the subject of considerable controversy, and there is a very learned and elaborate argument on the point in Hargreave's Law Tracts. We have already pointed out that section 6 of 26 HENRY 8, c. 6, provided in 1534, that felonies and serious criminal offences arising within the Lordships Marchers of WALES were to be tried in the next adjoining English county, which provision was afterwards confirmed by the 85th section of 34-35 HENRY 8, c. 26, but the general practice in civil suits was said to have prevailed (see Ambrose against Rees, II East's Reports, p. 370) even before the time of HENRY the Eighth. How this practice was affected by the jurisdiction of the Courts of Great Sessions is a matter upon which at present, owing to the absence of material information, we are unable to throw much light. But the truth most probably is that the assumption of the English Courts to exercise this jurisdiction, and to continue this practice, was founded on mere usurpation, and, like many other usurpations of jurisdiction, was supported by legal fictions. This Statute of 1773 provided that, after January 1, 1774, when actions arising within WALES were brought in any of his Majesty's Courts of Record outside WALES, and the plaintiff recovered a debt or damages under £10, no costs were to be given to him, and the defendant was to be entitled to a non-suit unless the Judge certified that the cause was proper to be tried in England, or that a question of title was involved. (The limit of £10 was subsequently altered in 1824 to £50.) WELSH Judges were authorized to appoint a deputy in certain cases. Special juries were to be struck in the Courts of Great Sessions as in the Courts at West