824 V. BENCH AND BAR Main Colliery Co.); a perfect example of systematic logic (RatclifFe v. Evans, Quartz Hill Gold Mining Co. v. Eyre), or a series of detailed answers to specific points urged in argument (Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.); statutory construction (Hewlett v. Allen, Thomas v. Quartermaine), or argument on the facts (Medawar v. Grand Hotel Co., Abrath v. Northeastern Ry. Co.) — we invariably find the same characteristic precision, sense of proportion, force and completeness of logic. Whatever the form, the result was well described by him in the course of his opinion in Re Portuguese, etc.. Mines, 45 Ch. D. 60: "As soon as one applies one's mind to dissect the ingenious argument, the light breaks through and makes the case perfectly plain." * (c) The House of Lords The membership of the House of Lords as a judicial tri- bunal is confined by the Judicature Act to Lords of Appeal, i. e., the Lord Chancellor of Great Britain, Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (limited to four), and peers who have held high ' For Lord Bowen's substantial contributions to English law the fol- lowing cases may be cited: Maxim-Nordenfelt Gun and Ammunition Co. v. Nordenfelt, (1893) 1 Ch. 631, which settled the law as to contracts in restraint of trade; Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor, 23 Q. B. D. 598, on the limits of trade selfishness by way of combination to exclude rivals ; Thomas v. Quartermaine, 18 Q. B. D. 685, on the duty of owners of premises, and the doctrine volenti non fit injuria; Le Lievre v. Gould, (1893) 1 Q. B. 491, on the limits of the law of negligence; RatcliflFe v. Evans, (1892) 2 Q. B. 524, on the evidence admissible to sustain an action for defama- tion; Finlay v. Chirney, 20 Q. B. D. 494, and Phillips v. Homfray. 24 Ch. D. 453, on the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona; Dal- ton V. Angus, 6 App. Cas. 779, on the right to subjacent support; Car- lill V. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., (1893) 1 Q. B.' 256, on the essential requisites to the formation of a contract; Cochrane v. Moore, 25 Q. B. D. 57, on the vexed question of the passing of property by voluntary gift; Smith v. Land & House Property Corporation, 28 Ch. D. 7, on actionable misrepresentation; Re Hodgson, 31 Ch. D. 177, on the rights in equity of creditors of joint debtors; Quartz Hill Gold Minine: Co. V. Eyre, 11 Q. B. D, 674, on malicious prosecution as a cause of action; Brunsden v. Humphrey, 14 Q. B. D. 141, and Mitchell v. Darley Main Colliery Co., 14 Q. B. D. 125, on the doctrine of res judioatae; Jacobs V. Credit Lyonnaise, 12 Q. B. D. 598, on the lex loci contractus and vis major; Johnstone v. Milling, 16 Q. B D. 460, on the limits of repudin- tion as a breach of contract; Merivale v. Carson, 20 Q. B. D. 275, on the distinction between fair public comment and privile;i-ed communica- tions in the law for libel; Newbigging v. Adam, 34 Ch. D. 582, on relief
