748 V. BENCH AND BAR like those who do so he looked with some distrust on proposals to change it." He sincerely beheved that the interests of justice were best served by a strict adherence to technical rules. The sixteen volumes of reports by Meeson and Welsby were his especial pride. " It is a lucky thing that there was not a seventeenth volume," said Erie, " for if there had been the common law itself would have disappeared altogether amidst the jeers of mankind." ^ In these pages, indeed, he may be seen at his best and his worst. He was one of the last of the judges who systematically delivered written opinions. They were prepared with great fulness and care, and do not fall far short of two thousand in number. Alderson (1834- 67) was a strong associate, learned, vigorous and efficient, and particularly capable as a criminal judge.^ Valuable assistance, particularly in its equitable jurisdiction, was rendered in this court by Rolfe (1839-50), who subsequently reached a higher station as Lord Cranworth. (c) Ecclesiastical and Admiralty Courts Probate, matrimonial and admiralty affairs were adminis- tered for centuries by the civilians ; but they left few records of their labors. As a system of judicial precedents this juris- ' When asked once why he had not written a book he replied: "My works are to be found in the pages of Meeson and Welsby." These volumes are the best monument of his industry. As most of the opinions are rendered by him, it is unnecessary to undertake to give a comprehensive selection. The following will suffice as examples: Norton v. Elain, 2 M. & W. 461 ; Langridge v. Levy, 2 do. 461 ; Nepean V. Knight, 2 do. 894; Doe d. Rees v. Williams, 2 do. 749; Harris v. Butler, 2 do. 539; Jackson v. Cummings, 5 do. 342; Evans v. Jones, 5 do. 77; Merry v. Green, 7 do. 623; Acton v. Blundell, 12 do. 324; King V. Hoare, 13 do. 494. Among his leading opinions in the House of Lords and Privy Coun- cil are Atwood v. Small, 6 CI. & F. ; Shore v. Wilson, 9 do. 353 ; O'Con- nell's case, 11 do. 155; Gibson v. Small, 4 H. L. Cas. 352; Jeffreys v. Boosey, 4 do. 842; Chasemore v. Richards, 7 do. 349; Wicker v. Hume, 7 do. 165; Dolphin v. Robbins, 7 do. 390; Wing v. Angrave, 8 do. 183; Brook V. Brook, 9 do. 195; Lynch v. Knight, 9 do. 587; Barry v. Buttin, 2 Moo. P. C. 480; Calder v. Halket, 3 do. 28. = Hadley v. Baxendale, 9 Ex. 341; Wood v. Leadbitter, 13 M. & W. 840; King v. Hoare, 13 do. 494; Skeffington v. Whitehurst, 1 Y. & C. 1; Startup V. Macdonald, 12 L. J., Ex. 477; Egerton v. Brownlow, 4 H. L. Cas. 1; Gibson v. Small, 4 do. 352; Jeffreys v. Boosey 4 do. 842.* O'Connell's case, 11 CI. & F. 155; Wright r. Tatham, 5 do. 670.
