W. VEEDER: A CENTURY OF JUDICATURE 777 suicide. His remarks in the Fernandez contempt case, 30 L. J., C. P. 321, in answer to the suggestions of counsel that the dignity and privileges of the court were involved, may be taken as a true index to his judicial character: " I take leave to say that I am not conscious of the vulgar desire to elevate myself, or the court of which I may be a member, by grasping after pre-eminence which does not belong to me, and that I will endeavor to be ever valiant in preserving and handing down those powers to do justice and to maintain truth which, for the common good, the law has entrusted to the judges." ^ Besides Williams,' who continued his service in this period, valuable assistance was rendered by Byles (1858-73), Keat- ing (1859-75), and M. E. Smith (1865-71). Byles con- tributed largely to the popularity of the court in commercial
- Some of his most elaborate and exhaustive opinions are Beamish
V. Beamish, 9 H. L. C. 274, an examination of the ecclesiastical sanctions to the contract of marriage; Ex parte Fernandez, 30 L. J., C. P. 321, on the validity of a commitment for contempt by a court of assize; Lloyd V. Guibert, I Q. B. 115, as to what law governs as to sea dam- age in a contract of affreightment; Exposito v. Bowden, 8 St. Tr. 817, as to the effect on a contract of affreightment of trading with an enemy; Mayor of London v. Cox, 3 E. and I. App. 252, on the history and principles of the practice of foreign attachment; Notara 13. Henderson, 7 Q. B. 225, on the duties of the master of a vessel ; Seymour v. London and Insurance Co., 41 L. J., C. P. 193, on contra- band of war; Phillips v. Eyre, 6 Q. B. 1, on the jurisdiction of English courts over acts committed abroad; Mody v. Gregson, 4 Ex. 49, as to the application of the doctrine of warranty in a sale by sample; Dawkins v. Lord Rokeby, 4 F. and F. 829, as to absolute privilege in libel ; Henwood v. Harrison, 7 C. P. 606, on fair criticism of matters of public interest; Shrewsbury v. Scott, 6 C. B. 1, on the disabilities of Catholics with respect to real property. It may be said of all these opinions, as Lord Campbell said in the House of Lords of Willes's opinion in Beamish v. Beamish, that they " display extraordinary re- search and will hereafter be considered a repertory of all the learning to be found in any language upon the subject." For further study, see also: Cook v. Lister, 13 C. B. (n . s.) 543 (bills of exchange); Dakin v. Oxley, 15 C. B. (n. s.) 646 (charter party); Gt. Western Ry. V. Talley, 6 C. P. 44 (negligence); Hall v. Wright, 29 L. J., Q. B. 43 (breach of promise) ; Intermaur v. Dames, 1 C. P. 274 (negligence) ; lonides v. Marine Ins. Co., 14 C. B. (n. s.) 259 (insurance) ; Kids- ton V. Empire Marine Ins. Co., 1 C. P. 535 (insurance) ; Malcomson V. O'Dea, 10 H. L. 611 (evidence) ; Mountstephen v. Lakeman, 7 Q. B. 196 (statute of frauds) ; Patter v. Rankin, 3 C. P. 562 (marine insur- ance) ; Ryder v. Wombell, 4 Ex. 32 (infant's necessaries) ; Reg. v. Rowton, 10 Cox Cr. Cas. 37 (evidence) ; Reuss v. Picksley, 1 Ex. 342 (statute of frauds) ; Santos v. Illidge, 28 L. J., C. P. 317 (emancipa- tion act) ; Wilson v. Jones, 2 Ex. 139 (insurance) ; Bonillon v. Lup- ton, 15 C. B. (n. s.) 113 (marine insurance).
