DICKENS’ FIND

Greymouth Evening Star, 8 June 1937, Page 10

DICKENS’ FIND

i BARDELL V. PIC-KWIGK. j "Pickwick" contains faithfully-re- | corded fragments of legal history which fallible human memory cannot bo expected to retain, and the story of tho suit tor breach of promise of I marriage brought . by Mrs. Bardcll, 1 widow, against Samuel Pickwick, gen- | tieman, is a mine of useful information to the antiquarian, writes Air. Theobald Mathew 1, in “For Lawyers and Others,” according to "John o’ London’s Weekly.” Dickens wrote the story for Chap-

11l UH ullu x let 11 1; 111 111 v <ll c. 111 11 (which, with other now-departed Inns of Chancery, Air. Mathew considers later in his book) and dedicated it to ’lhcmas Noon Talfourd, “the father of tho first Copyright Act,” whom all I authors should gratefully remember. Talfourd had been engaged as counsel in a real life and momentous suit brought by the Hon. George Norton against the Prime Minister, Lord Melbourne. :illpaiii£r the sodiietinn of his;

wife, who was a grankldjairghter of Richard Brinsley Sheridan and Hie original of Meredith’s "Diana of the Crossways;”—a fact that Mr. Mathew might include in future editions. The principle evidence consisted of three brief and not, on the face of them, very incriminating notes written by the noble lord to Airs. Norton. From this, and from a certain resem-

blance in forensic style between Sergeant. Buzfuz and Sis William Follett, I who appeared for Mr. Norton, it seems likely that the first, conception of Bardcll v. Pickwick arose from the nincl • lays’ wonder of Norton v. Al el bourne, and Hie fact that Talfourd was an intimate friend of Dickens adds the final link of probability. History adds its own not displeasing coincidence, for

.although the “sittings after term” were later abolished at the Guildhall, in the. fullitcss of time lite law fell to be interpreted in the Guildhall by Henry J “eld: ng Dickens. K.C.. Common Sergeant. :on of the author of "Pickwick." lie where Mr. Justice Startleigii took and deciphered, his m. te of evidi nee. and the usher, if minded io call Elizabeth Cluppins before him, itad still to seek her, should niio fail to answer, iu King Street.

Talfourd was also a Sergeant, indeed tiie last to be appointed to that cilice, in 1833, before Lord Brougham 'as ho thought 1 abolished the. Ser-

ct auto, and Mr. Mathew Jias much ■odd ami fascinating information to inii part silwul this oiicc-bighly privileged I ;eid'.i. Until 1846 the Sergeants alonej ] were permitted to plead in the Court i ■of Common Pleas, and until LS7:‘> ill war. a firm tradition that every .Imlgel should be Sergeant as well. On becoming a member of the order the new] Sergeant had to present gold rings to all kinds of people, including the King, the prim c-; of the. blood, the dukes, ami many high legal othcers and any archbi: hop who thought it worth while. to be. present at the

swearing-in romony in order t>> to his stock o' personal jcv-.c'b •y 1 Sometimes; it i regrettable to i'i «riJ Sergeants tried to save on the calm.'! of iho ring metal, and some of 'bemj '■i'i into serious trouble over it. j Timy •■•err nt or,.* 1 firm* 1 a slit; k<r-T chief 011 the head, known as a <oif.i

'This wm. infer r iuiued to a "black patch with .' white edging” let into the top of the. wig. which provoked one poor prisoner to refer to the .Judge who had sentenced him as “sore-'cml.’’j There is a tablet in Chancery Lane] < ommomorating the site of Sergeant’s' Jun. and when the otlice was abolish ] cd in 1877. the Sergeants advertised th<> inn as for sale, and ultimately disposed of it at public auction, from which each Sergeant profited to the extent of about £l5OO.