HONOUR OF THE COURT

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 23 December 1922, Page 10

HONOUR OF THE COURT

( Oi.D-Tl-MK I'lV .ai u>: ! ! SEVER HD HAND KOI! CONTEMPT hr the course of a paper on ‘'Contempt of Court." read hotore the solicitors attending the niee! ing of the I .aw Society in Leeds. Mr Edward A. Bell, a noted Condon lawyer, recalled many interest ing happenings in the old days and the old-time punishments inflicted for contempt. There w;m a time, he said, when the man who threw a missile which strucu a judge, a, litigant, or even an attorney, pit.vided he of they wore inside the court, was punished on the spot; his j right hand was struck off before the interested, and no doubt sufficiently impressed spectators, who hazarded atten- ! dance upon such justice. According to the statute of Henry VII[., in part repealed but otherwise, it--1 is hoped, obsolete, the of llie right hand was a sensational procedure'. It still can be performed, it is presiuncle in public. The chief surgeon on the King’s household must be present, to sear the stump-—the sergeant of the ewry with clothes for the chief surgeon to remedy any “damage feasant.” to the medical attire.

POULTRY ON HAND “The sergeant of the poultry must a/so be present with a cock ready in his hand to wrap about the slump”—a seemingly needless ineonve.nienco for tne fowl. “The culprit, after losing his right hand, had other consolations. The sergeant of the pantry gave him bread, and the sergeant of the cellar mud he ready to give the coni cm nor a ‘pot’ of red wine; and thereupon the contempt was urged and 'he King’s peace .satisfied.”

j Mr Dell went mi lo speak of eoutemp- ! live advocates and attorneys, and said that learned counsel are peculiarly 1 within I lie whiff and whim of conj tempt. ‘'Counsel is liable for contempl if he i insults a juryman in a court presided i over hv one of His Majesty’s judges. -V learned counsel once while in court thanked the Almighty that a juryman (who had interrupted him) was not the sole juryman to determine the issue. Counsel.' afler verdict was given, was fined £SO. j HAD TO KKHP DIATI.V j j “It is reasonable to behove Ud f . was | a bard case, a juryman having the privi- | Inre to be impertinent to counsel. A 1 I though, during the roars- 1 of the trial, | if iie eat or drink without leave of the i judge he ' is guilty of contempt.” [ H had boon adumbrated in certain '(daces that a solicitor committed contempt if he destroyed bis paper or rcTrained: fnun keeping a diary. ‘‘Parenthetically,” added the speaker, “may it be tentatively staled that if aj diary be kent. it should he in cipher.” •‘Describing a few of the various hinds of contempt, Air Alell mentioned that litigants in person are peculiarly immune from the penalties ol contemn! of court. “Once.” he said, ‘‘when a. very learned and able judge, who is noted for bis illuminating wit. and who lor a long time had borne during the heat of the dav (he wearisome pertimasious banali lies of a litigant in person, suddenly

snsiAcd the litigant by a lightning (’li'iike of subtle (TtViac.-eian e i,.( wisdom, which m ihe month - nf the mighty in Daully becomes wit. he was interrupted by the litigant with the query, ‘May we laugh at your jokes, my lord?' His'i.nnlshin, appreciating that hilarity in court was contempt, replied in the negative, and the incident dosed. GOT WARD'S PROPERTY Quoting one reported ease, he said:— “A farseeiug and correctly-minded man obtained the consent of the lord chancellor to pay his addresses to a ward, he on Ids part undertaking to abide by the directions of the court. This particular equity judge did nob deem it his duly to attend the coming of age of Ids ward; and on that day the prescient and provident suitor was married to the ward, having first taken care that the young lady should settle the whole of her fortune upon him. The equity judge eommi’Aod the young husband. The Court of Appeal reversed the order, being of opinion that the marriage with the lady after she came of age was not contempt.

“If one is to believe the present trend of outspoken feminine opinion, the future practice of the Chancery Court will be to require, as a condition precedent to the Lord Chancellor’s consent to the wooing of a ward of court, that tho prospective husband do covenant to put all his properly into his wife’s name.

“In fact it is expected the next Married Women’s Property Act will consist of one clause only, in wit: ‘No marriage shall he celebrated unless and until the exigent, husband do transfer to the prospective wife tin* whole of his real and personal estate.' “This would save much trouble in (he Bankruptcy Court, which, however, might Hereafter have to he transferred from its chancery home to the divorcedivision, where marriages and settlements are alike rectified.”