LORD CAMPBELL'S LIVES OF THE CHIEF JUSTICES OF ENGLAND.* THE present Chief Justice of England believes, دو dered fair terms. He lived cheaply in London, and dined, when he could leave the Temple, for sevenpence-halfpenny, and a halfpenny to the waitress, in the neigbourhood of Chancery-lane, where the feat may still be accomplished; although the greater number of customers make the second item a penny, as Mr. Lloyd Kenyon, who was an economical yet a just man, would have done, if he had known that the place was bought and paid for. Waiters and waitresses in these coffee-shops pay handsomely for leave to serve. One city man in that trade is said recently to have been driven in from his country place every morning in his own phaeton by his own two ponies; and to have departed at night in the same style. But he was an artiste in his profession, who excelled in pleasing his customers, and receiving from them acknowledgments of the most substantial kind for his services. We remember one waitress in a small coffee-house, who resigned her occupation, because she could not afford to pay her master more than eighteen shillings weekly, for leave to do his work; while another had offered twenty shillings. One hundred years ago matters were differently ordered; and the value of the perquisite system was unknown, or Mr. Kenyon would have paid the penny, exacted by the common habit and repute of these places. He was called to the bar in 1754, but he did not make any figure or much money for a number of years; nor until Mr. Dunning, a barrister, with more briefs than brains, employed him to abridge his briefs, and thus to afford him a general view of the cases that he had to plead. Mr. Dunning paid nothing for this labour; but it introduced his fag to attornies, who employed Kenyon as a chamber counsel and paid him small sums for his opinions. They were good law, but unsatisfactory to the profession, because they were very short, and produced only a small price for copies. Lord Kenyon, the first of the chief justices whose lives are recorded in this volume, was the second son of a Welsh squire, who was a Justice of the Peace for Flintshire, and proprietor of the estates of Bryn and Gredington, in the parish of Hanmer and the county named. These estates, even when united, were not of great importance, but, as acquisitions by matrimony, they were evidences that the Kenyons prospered in one branch of the business of life-the father and the grandfather of the Chief Justice married well. The grandfather married Bryn, and the father Greding. ton. That official was, however, only a second son; and having been taught a little Latin, less arithmetic, and no Greek, he began the world as an attorney's clerk at Nantwich. Our society of advocates in Scotland require the juvenile aspirants for briefs to work through a dreary curriculum at one of the universities, before they can pass to the bar. The barristers-their contemporaries in England, were less particular once, and passed any man who, after eating a certain number of dinners, and paying for them, was able to stand an examination of a superficial nature. The only difference between the student of law who had, and the student who had not, taken a degree at any university, was in the latter being required to study law for five years. Mr. Lloyd Kenyon was born in 1732, and was turned into Brick Court, Temple, in 1750, to pass through his probation of five years. This transfer to the bar from the desk was made practicable by the death of his elder brother, when the attorney's clerk became heir apparent to the family estates-small estates-in Flintshire; and his old master in Nantwich refused to make him a partner, on what he consi-riots. Mr. Kenyon was employed ultimately to do for Thurlow, on the bench, the sort of work that he had performed for Dunning at the bar, and the Lord Chancellor, anxious to repay him in some form, and confident of his legal knowledge, made him Chief-Justice of Chester, when the office fell into his gift, and the situation was satisfactory to the Welsh barrister, because it included North Wales in its circuit. This good fortune came to Kenyon in 1780, and in the autumn of the same year he was elected to Parliament for the borough of Hindon, in Wiltshire. Mr. Kenyon was not a good speaker, and never addressed juries to advantage, yet he was counsel for Lord George Gordon, when he was tried on the charge of high treason, originating in the celebrated No-Popery To the advocacy of the other counsel in *London: John Murray. 1 Vol. future, and to confine himself more closely to his judicial functions. In 1788 Lord Mansfield resigned his seat on the Bench as Chief Justice; and Mr. Pitt gave the appointment to the Master of the Rolls, who was also elevated to the peerage. the cause, Mr. Erskine, Lord George Gordon was indebted, however, for his acquittal. In 1782, Mr. Kenyon was appointed Attorney-General, under Lord Rockingham's administration, through the kindness of his friend, Lord Thurlow, who was still Lord Chancellor, and who believed that the Government had more need of a good lawyer than Lord Kenyon's legislative career, both in the of a fine orator in that office. lower and the upper house, was distinguished by The Rockingham cabinet was a coalition Go-hatred to change of all kinds, and almost upon vernment, and as is usual in such cases, was disunited, for the Attorney-General insisted on bringing in a bill to render the public servants, or their executors and heirs, liable to pay interest for the balances of money that had remained in their hands from time to time; although the measure would have ruined Charles James Fox, who was then a Secretary for State in the same ministry. This seems to have been a pet measure of the Attorney-General's, who insisted upon its performance, alike in office and in opposition, although its justice may be doubted, since the paymasters were compelled to account for the money in their names, even if it had been lost by open investment-as with their bankers, for example. Seeing, then, that the nation ran no hazard, it may be, and it was argued, that they had no right to know how the paymasters invested balances, for which they had given security. When the Rockingham ministry were broken up, Fox and Kenyon parted company. They were most dissimilar in their character, and the wonder how the Rockingham Government lived even for a time with such discordant elements has never been solved. The lawyer rode his hobby on, not against the paymasters, who were supposed to speculate with the balances of public money in their hands, alone; but against the ghosts of all who had ever had a balance of public funds, or against their heirs and executors. Private pique may have had something to do with this excessive zeal for the five per cents.; and at any rate the Kenyons were a clean-handed family. They had not been enriched by the pickings of interest on public | balances in their hands; and their representative was unsuccessful in obtaining for the public those returns which he earnestly and frequently sought. A contested election for Westminster, in which Mr. Fox appeared to be the successful candidate, was followed by a scrutiny that, from the notoriety of the candidate, engaged the attention of the public, for it threatened to outlive the parliament. Sir Lloyd Kenyon, who, in 1784 had been appointed Master of the Rolls, was one of Mr. Fox's strenuous and stubborn opponents; and he defended the scrutiny in and out of Parliament, with the violence of an imprudent partisan. Mr. Scott, afterwards Lord Eldon, although he bitterly opposed the politics of Mr. Fox, supported him in this instance, and held that the scrutiny was conducted in a most objectionable manner, because it was evidently intended to spend money and time. The odium caused by the transaction induced Sir Lloyd Kenyon to meddle less with politics for the any subject. He was especially opposed to Mr. Fox's bill to amend the law of libel; although it was supported by Mr. Pitt's Government. And he sought to maintain the old fiction, that the falsehood or truth of the libellous matter did not decrease or increase its obnoxious character in the eyes of the law. He was also anxious to oppose any change of the law by which the jury could express an opinion respecting the character of the matter published, and he wished to leave that privilege entirely with the judge. It was alleged In 1797 he opposed Lord Moira's "bill to abolish imprisonment for debt" (sic), as Lord Campbell himself writes, in making extracts from his predecessors sic in the original. Lord Kenyon's opposition to the proposal was a difficulty that should have been anticipated. A charge of a very annoying character, was, during the discussion, preferred against him personally. that in his official capacity as Chief-Justice, he derived a profit from the sale of beer and spirits to the prisoners in the Court of King's Bench. The charge was contained in a petition presented to the House, and although many abuses existed in the last century, as many still exist; and Lord Kenyon was a miser, and held money in high estimation; yet he was an honest man, and, perhaps, above the acceptance of fees or perquisites from the source indicated. His bitter and indignant denial of the assertion was not, however, requisite to give vigour to his opposition to the bill; and he said that "For the public good, I am clearly of opinion that imprisonment for debt should continue." Lord Campbell adds that "The bill was thrown out by a majority of 37 to 21, and did not pass till above forty years afterwards, when I had the honour to re-introduce it." We entertain high respect for Lord Campbell as a law reformer, but we were not aware that a bill had yet passed "to abolish imprisonment for debt." On the contrary, the old system exceedingly flourishes. If any one of our readers choose to get into debt for more than twenty pounds, and cannot pay the money, he may learn soon that Lord Campbell is entirely mistaken in his claim for credit, on account of passing a bill to abolish imprisonment for debt. A bill was passed to abolish imprisonment for debts under twenty pounds; but Lord Brougham and other law reformers allowed a clause to creep into the bill for establishing county courts, which gave power of imprisonment to their judges, for all amounts within their jurisdiction, and for any period. Thus, barristers of inferior standing to the judges, in the supreme courts of England, were armed with a power which the learned fathers of the bar did not possess; and some of them used that power in a manner so relentless as to make other members of the legal profession ashamed of it; and an act to abolish it passed in the last session of Parliament; but the City County Court was not named in the act, and being omitted by this accident, its presiding genius goes on imprisoning, as the only man in England who has the power, for debts under twenty pounds. A biography of Chief-Justices, written by a Chief Justice, will be considered an authority on law a hundred years hence; and the present Chief Justice should have been more careful than to say that more than forty years after 1797;-abill passed which he had the honour of re-introducing to abolish imprisonment for debt. The only way open to the learned author of correcting this error, without a new edition, is to lose no time in carrying a bill for that object through Parliament in the next session. We are now sixty years after 1797, and next year we will be sixty-one years in advance of that date, but "more than forty years will cover the exact time with one half over; and the book may be rendered correct after the autumn of 1858 by this step. Lord Kenyon was a favourite at court, because he adopted conscientiously all the views of George the Third; yet that monarch occasionally reproved his Chief Justice for the failings, and the faults exhibited by him on the bench. The Chief-Justice was not a learned man, although by courtesy he had the title; but he was addicted to the use of Latin quotations, as many other persons are, who comprehend them dimly. The quotations were misplaced occasionally, and these errors were bluntly mentioned by the King, if the following anecdote be correct: The misfortune of his defective education now became more conspicuous, for he had not acquired enough general knowledge to make him ashamed or sensible of his ignorance, and without the slightest misgiving, he blurted out observations which exposed him to ridicule. He was particularly fond of quoting a few scraps of Latin which he had picked up at school, or in the attorney's office, without being aware of their literal meaning. In addition to the "modus in rebus," he would say that, in advancing to a right conclusion, he was determined "stare super antiquas vias," and when he declared that there was palpable fraud in a case, he would add apparently "latet anguis in herba." At last George the Third, one day at a levee, said to him, "My lord, by all I can hear, it would be well if you would stick to your good law, and leave off your bad Latin," but this advice, notwithstanding his extraordinary loyalty, he could not be induced to follow. Bad Latin was not the only objection to the Chief-Justice at Court, he had also a bad temper; and George the Third is said to have rebuked that fault in a pointed and rude style. The saying has been ascribed to less notable personages than that monarch, and we consider, with the author, this anecdote apocryphal. | Such was the general opinion respecting the infirmity of his temper, that the following anecdote was eirculated and believed, although the epigrammatic point, and the rudeness which it imputes to George the Third, were equally at variance with the character of that royal personage: “Lord Kenyon being at the levee, soon after an extraordinary explosion of ill humour in the Court of King's Bench, his Majesty said to him, "My Lord Chief-Justice, I hear that you have lost your temper, and from my great regard for you, I am very glad to hear it, for I hope you will find a better one." All these failings, nevertheless, were much more than counterbalanced by his professional learning, his energy, and his probity, so that he was not only admired by common jurymen who were on a level with him as to general acquirements, and with whose feelings and prejudices he sympathised, but his brother judges, in all the Courts at Westminster, owned his superiority, the bar succumbed to his despotic sway, and the public, while they laughed at his peeuliarities, confided in him and honoured him. I can hardly point out any principle on which he openly proforcement of the rule, that in the possessory action of eject fessed to differ from his predecessor, except the rigid en. ment the legal estate shall always prevail. Lord Kenyon had an unfortunate liability to Latin quotations, notwithstanding the monarch's warning; and he continued it to the end. In trying a prosecution against the late Mr. Perry, for a libel which was said to be contained in a copy of the Morning Chronicle, he referred to the defence set up, that the same sheet contained unexceptionable matter, even according to the state of the law in those days, and told the jury that "there may be morality and virtue in this paper; and yet apparently latet anguis in herbá." But the jury would, perhaps, have as fully understood the direction of the judge, if he had told them, that after all there lurked a snake among Mr. Perry's grass; and with that gentleman's consent. He even coined novelties; and, in charging the jury empanelled to try John Reeve for a libel on the English constitution, he began one sentence by saying, "The quo animo, which the prosecution imputes to the defendant's is this." Indeed, quo animo as a noun was rather a favorite with Chief Justice Kenyon; but his biographer and historian delights in the recapitulation of these stories. Lord Kenyon's love for modus in rebus, in and out of place, is apparent from more than one anecdote. Then his error regarding Julian the Apostate, committed in his charge on the trial of Williams, for publishing Paine's Age of Reason, is twice told, first at page 57, in the following form : "Christianity," said he, " from its early institution met with its opposers. Its professors were very soon called KENYON AND ELLENBORough. apon to publish their 'Apologies' for the doctrines they had embraced. In what manner they did that, and whether they had the advantage of their adversaries, or sunk under the superiority of their arguments, mankind, for nearly two thousand years, had an opportunity of judging. They have seen what Julian, Justin Martyr, and other apologists have written, and have been of opinion that the argument was in favour of those publications." The error was very ridiculous from that place and at that time, yet the purpose of its narration would have been served without the reproduction at page 88, of the following passage from Coleridge's Table-Talk: But some of the stories circulated respecting his his. torical allusions and quotations must have been exaggerations or pure inventions. Thus, Coleridge, in his "TableTalk," relates that Lord Kenyon, in addressing the jury in a blasphemy case, after pointing out several early Christians who had adorned the gospel, added, "Above all, gentlemen, need I name to you the Emperor Julian, who was so celebrated for every Christian virtue, that he was called JULIAN THE APOSTLE ?" So, in the collection of legal anecdotes, entitled "Westminster Hall," the noble and learned lord is represented as concluding an elaborate address on dismissing a grand jury, with the following valedictory address:"Having thus discharged your consciences, gentlemen, you may retire to your homes in peace, with the delightful consciousness of having performed your duties well, and may lay your heads upon your pillows, saying to yourselves "Aut Casar aut nullus.” No doubt can exist that Coleridge embellished these anecdotes, and their reappearance here is unnecessary for any ordinary biographical object. Stupid repetitions of the same anecdote, or an anecdote in similar language, occur frequently. Thus, we have the story of the diphthong, the last of Lord Kenyon's acts on earth-told where it should be told, if told at all, at page 23 : If we can believe his immediate successor, who had a fair character for veracity, Lord Kenyon studied economy even in the hatchment, put up over his house in Lincoln'sinn-fields after his death. The motto was certainly found to be "Mors Janua Vita," this being at first supposed to be the mistake of the painter. But when it was mentioned to Lord Ellenborough, "Mistake!" exclaimed his Lordship, "it is no mistake. The considerate testator left particular directions in his will that the estate should not be burdened with the expense of a diphthong." A graver fault was his indulging in partialities and antiErskine was his pet; pathies against particular barristers. he delighted to decide in favour of this popular advocate, and when obliged to overrule him, he would give his head a good-natured shake, and say with a smile, "It won't do Mr. Erskine-it won't do." Law, on the contrary, was so snubbed by him, that at last he openly complained of his constant hostility, in the well-known quotation: Non mea tua fervida terrent Dicta, ferox [pointing to Erskine] Di me terrent [pointing to the Bench] Et JUPITER hostis. Again, at page 133, the whole story is repeated at great length; but this time, in the life of Lord Ellenborough, and with the intimation that Chief Justice Kenyon did not understand Latin, so as to take the sarcasm out of the quotation, but considered himself complimented. So he was, upon Mr. Erskine's principle, who when one of his clients was prosecuted for defaming the character of a noble lord by declaring that he might sit for a portrait of Satan, insisted that the insinuation was hugely flattering, and quoted Milton in support of his opinion that the personal appearance of Satan was most fascinating and intellectual; and any peer in the land might be proud of the comparison. Mr. Law of the following quotation became in after years Chief Justice, and Lord Ellenborough. From the oratorical school in which he was exercised, while representing Warren Hastings, he actually improved in his style of doing business; and by the authority he acquired he was better able to compete with Lord Kenyon, who bore a strong dislike to him, and was ever pleased with This narrow-minded and an opportunity to put him down. ill-educated, thongh learned and conscientious Chief Justice, had no respect for Law's classical acquirements, and had been deeply offended by the quick-eared Carthusian laughing at his inapt quotations and false quantities. Erskine, who had more tact and desire to conciliate, was the Chief Justice's especial favourite, and was supposed to have his "ear" or "the length of his foot." Law having several times, with no effect, hinted at this partiality, after he had gained much applause by his speech upon the Begum charge, openly denounced the injustice by which he suffered. In the course of a trial at Guildhall, he had been interrupted by the Chief Justice while opening the plaintiff's case, whereas Erskine's address for the defendant was accompanied by smiles and nods from his lordship, which encouraged the advocate, contrary to his usual habit, to conclude with some expressions of menace and bravado. Law, having replied to these with great spirit and effect, thus concluded: Lord Campbell's solemnity in the matter is altogether unnecessary. "If we can believe." What are we to believe? A joke of Lord Ellenborough's, and a rather coarse one, which we assuredly are not expected to believe; although it is one at which some people will laugh, while Lord Camp-client remains unimpeached. bell has probably sent to a house and sign painter's, for the purpose of ascertaining the difference between painting A and E diphthong. We have the same thing repeated at page 242 in the life of Lord Ellenborough : Being told that the undertaker had made a foolish mistake in the hatchment, put up on Lord Kenyon's house after the death of that frugal Chief-Justice, " Mors Janua Vita," his successor exclaimed, "No mistake at all, sir-there is no mistake; it was by particular directions in his will. It saved the expense of a diphthong!" Lord Kenyon preferred Erskine to Law, and have two editions of another Latin story arising out of that circumstance. we Perhaps, gentlemen, I may without arrogance assume that I have successfully disposed of the observations of my learned friend, and that the strong case I have made for my Still, my experience in this court renders me fearful of the result. When I have finished, the summing up is to follow." Looking at Erskine, he exclaimed, "Non me tua fervida terrent Dicta, ferox." He then made a bow to the Chief Justice, and as he sat down he added, in a low and solemn tone, 'Di me terrent et JUPITER HOSTIS."" Lord Kenyon, thinking that the quotation must be apologetical and complimentary, bowed again, and summed up impartially. When it was explained to him, his resentment was very bitter, and to his dying day he hated Law. But henceforth he stood in awe of him, and treated him more courteously. We still say that Lord Kenyon was complimented by being compared to Jupiter. the ground of insanity. The trial was remarkable, if Lord Campell be correct in saying that Erskine's ablest speech perhaps, "and therefore the finest speech ever delivered at the English bar," was made that day. It was also a remarkable trial from the nature of the defence, and from the detention of the prisoner, without any law to warrant that course. "But the statutes 46 George III., chapters 93, 94 were passed," legalising the detention in this and all similar cases. The same tendency to repeat stale jokes runs through all the work; and yet we are informed that the life of Lord Kenyon was commenced in 1849, when the biographer had the near prospect of being himself a Chief Justice of England, and that is now a long time since-viz., eight years precisely on the 12th current, a period during which, in these busy times, a man might correct many pages of manuscript. We might also expect literary precision from a lawyer who entered the Court of King's Bench, fifty-seven years past, the Lord Kenyon had a bitter hatred towards all 28th of June. Being then a boy," (sic) in the the vices of the press, and those general in "this text, as the biographer says. "Then a boy!" | libertine age," and he confounded invariably the Well, our boyhood was cut short at fourteen or nature of a civil action for damages with the fifteen years of age, or somewhere there; and we criminal punishment which the defendant might opine that the present Chief Justice of England or might not have incurred. He tried one case never saw London, during the years when it would against the Morning Post in which the jury gave have been true to say of himself "being still a £4,000 of damages to Lady Elizabeth Lambert, boy." We can forgive any lady under four score because that journal had stated that "she had the vanity of cutting four or five years from her made a faux pas with a gentleman of the shoulder age, by saying, respecting any particular time, knot." The damages were excessive in one respect, being then a girl," when she really was mar- but they could scarcely be called improper, seeing But a riageable, and, probably, was married. that Lord Campbell says it was "the very infamous Chief Justice is not entitled to this indulgence, practice of some fashionable journals to invent not being an old woman. His Lordship's first scandalous stories of persons in high life"— and visit, "being then a boy," to the Court of King's other persons in high life must have liked to read Bench, may be described in his own language them; but, for the story in question, the defendant only for the pleasure of learning something new- confessed that no ground existed, while his parathat is how a notion may be inspired. Mr. Grant, graph was inadvertent, and proceeded upon misinthe Solicitor-General, it will be observed, according formation. to the author, "inspired notions." Now, a notion, peradventure, might be an inspiration; but how itself could ever become the subject of inspiration, requires a man in scarlet and ermine, along with a collar of SS, to explain. On the 28th June, 1800, being yet a boy, for the first time in my life I entered the Court of King's Bench, and with these eyes I beheld Lord Kenyon. The scene was by no means so august as I had imagined to myself. I expected to see the judges sitting in the great hall, which, though very differently constructed for magnificence, might be compared to a Roman forum. The place where the trial was going on was a small room enclosed from the open space at the south-east angle, and here were crowded together the judges, the jury, the counsel, the attorneys, and the reporters, with little accommodation for bystanders. My great curiosity was to see Erskine, and I was amazingly struck by his noble features and animated aspect. Mitford, the Attorney-Genoral, seemed dull and heavy; but Grant, the Solicitor-General, immediately inspired the notion of extraordinary sagacity. Law looked logical and sarcastic. Garrow verified his designation of "the tame tiger." There were five or six rows of counsel, robed and wigged, sitting without the bar-but I never heard the name of any of these mentioned before. I was surprised to find the four Judges all dressed exactly alike. This not being a saint's day, the Chief Justice did not wear his collar of SS to distinguish him from his brethren. There was an air of superiority about him, as if accustomed to give rule-but his physiognomy was coarse and contracted. Mr. Justice Grose's aspect was very foolish, but he was not by any means a fool, as he showed by being in the right when he differed from the rest. Mr. Justice Lawrence's smile denoted great Acuteness and discrimination. Mr. Justice Le Blanc looked prim and precise. The court had assembled to try Hadfield for shooting at George III. He was acquitted upon common nuisances," Lord Kenyon proposed to suppress gambling, and recommended the prosecution of "fashionable gaming establishments" as adding, that "if auy such prosecutions are fairly brought before me, and the guilty parties are convicted, whatever may be their rank or station in the country, though they may be the first ladies in the land, they shall certainly exhibit themselves in the pillory." The Earl of Carlisle of that day referred in his place in the Peers to this threat, talked of "legal monks," who "thought that they must be virtuous in proportion as they were coarse and ill-mannered" and the Chief Justice retaliated with the declaration that "the judges of the land see much more of actual life on their circuits, and in Westminster Hall, than if they were shut up in gaming houses and brothels." Forestaling and regrating" he opposed with extreme severity; and although the statutes against the ordinary business of wholesale dealers in provisions had been repealed, yet he caught this class under his interpretation of the common law of the land. Buying provisions to resell to the consumers he allowed to be legitimate commerce, as the farmer could hardly sell the produce of his farm by retail; but any buying of provisions, with a view to resell to a dealer at an advanced price he declared had a direct tendency to deprive the poor of the necessaries of life, and therefore "blinked upon murder;" and Lord Campbell "is ashamed to say that most of the puisne judges participated in the hallucination of the Chief |