EQUITY IN NEW SOUTH WALES.

Auckland Examiner, Volume 1, Issue 2, 18 December 1856, Page 3

EQUITY IN NEW SOUTH WALES.

[From the Launceston Examiner.] “I recollect,” says Lord Brougham,“ a saying of a very great man in the Court of Qneen’s Bench ; the judge having said of his client, “Let him go into a Conrt of Equity.” Mr. Erskine answered in an artless tone of voice, which made Westminster Hall ring with laughter, “Would your Lordship send a fellow creature there ?” In Australia the same judges have jurisdiction in civil, criminal, ecclesiastic, and equity proceedings, and it is not surprising if one or more branches are neglected to the serious detriment of suitors This seems to be especially the state of affairs in the sister colony, and their appears to be no effectual remedy except a sub-division of the bar. The arrears of chancery buisness are so large that the attention of the bench has been attracted to the subject. On a recent occasion, Mr. Justice Therry observed that the—

‘•Equity business ought to be brought under the attention of the Legislature without delay, unless some other means of improvement, of which he at present saw no chance, could be adopted. Several Courts were sitting at once, and the same set of counsel being retained both in Equity and at Common Law, it followed that whilst in Court some trumpery case of assault was being disposed of the adjudictibn of that case was made the means of holding in suspense suits upon the determination of which the ownership of thousands of pounds' worth of property depended.” Mr. Milford mentioned a fact in illustration of the state business in this Court. “• He had taken the trouble to ascertain how ofter he had attended merely to consent to a motion in the case of Styles x. M’Encroe, and found that, although he had thus attended, twenty times, the matter was not yet disposed of, and simply because counsel bad not attended on the other side to make the motion.” Mr. Butler remarked :— <• Nor wasitonly theparties before the Court that shouldbeconsidered; for a practitioner in this Court had informed him that many clients were obliged to compomise their rights at a grevious disadvantage because they believed that redress in equity was, owing to the delays . alluded to, almost hopeless.”

“ The Master in Equity (Mr. Carey) drew attention to the fact that the business standing over in this day’s paper alone, placed at issue £50,000 worth of property, and consequently could bear no comparison in point of importance with the paltry cases already alluded to. Yet every case in the paper was postponed, because the counsel engaged were not in attendance.’

A reform is certainly required in New South Wales, and though we have not heard similar complaints in Tasmania, time and multiplied transactions will be certain to produce them. This, is a subject we commend to the notice of Mr Rogers, who could no doubt devise a method by which delay and expense might be minimzed in Courts of Equity.