On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
according to the privacy principles of the equity court . They swore they thought this name A . " was John ' s hand-writing . John ' s children were advised by their counsel not to attempt the feeble cross-examination of these witnesses which equity allows , as it could serve them nothing . They gave notice , therefore , to
the plaintiffs , to produce the note to witnesses of theirs who knew John ' s writing well ; but this production was refused , and , according to equity , it could not be compelled . By chance , John ' s widow , who knew his affairs well , had seen the note . She swore that it was not his signature , and that he had never borrowed money of his brother . In this state the cause came before that excellent Greek scholar , the Vice-Chancellor . The defendants '
counsel stated the refusal to show the note to them or to their witnesses , and asked that it might be sent either to a jury or to the Master , to ascertain if the signature was John ' s , they paying the expenses if it turned out to be his . That excellent Greek scholar , however , said , that although it was certainly perverse in the plaintiffs not to produce the note to the defendant ' s witnesses , yet he was satisfied it was John ' s signature , and therefore should
order John ' s estate to pay the money , without allowing any further inquiry . Now whether , according to the principles of an equity court , this may be an equitable decision , is not the question . We ask only whether such modes of taking evidence , in a country which pretends to care for freedom and justice , are to be tolerated ? Would not an equity judge , to whom these things are matter of notoriety , seize on the first forlorn hope of cleansing from such filth , the fountain of equity , which his claily duty is to administer ? Lord Brougham has been Chancellor between two and three years , and has brought in a much vaunted measure to purify his court , and , nevertheless , has left untouched every one of its principles . Besides the legal and money tendency of these rules , what evil , as a matter of education and influence , must they not induce on any people taught to dignify them with the
name of Equity ? The chicanery of the practitioner , and the dishonesty of the client , are largely attributable to this source . In availing himself of them , how much of the skill of the former consists ; and how little is his conduct esteemed immoral , or ,
rather , how much are not his talent and tact applauded , and , as a consequence , his services required , as he makes use of these impure advantages ! And when the skilful use of the iniquities of the law , is so a matter of credit in the world , as to distort ils moral principles and harden its feelings , is it not hi g h time for all interested in the production of good , to detect and point out fertile sources of mischief , very little , we fear , attended to ?
It is not by any means on its principles alone , that we fouml our broad condemnation of the tendency of equity as at present established . In its practice , it has numerous rules repugnant to the simplest reason . Some no doubt have been improved ; others
Untitled Article
124 Lord Brougham ' s Chancery Reforms .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1834, page 124, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2630/page/40/
-