WIG-MAKERS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 6 August 1929, Page 6

WIG-MAKERS

LAST OF FOUR GENERATIONS

WHY DOES RENCH AND ll\\\ WEAK

IUUNITY OK COUR'I

The death a few months ago of the well-known maker of lawyers' wigs, Mr Ernest Ward Rnvenseroft. of Star Yard, Carey street, London, has disclosed the fuel thai he was the last of fou,r generations of legal wig-makers, all born 111 tilt; same I se. (writes L. M. Addison in l lie Sydney "Daily Telegraph"). Mr Itavenscrufl left a large fortune, presumably made in the course/if his business.

What, was the origin of the practice of judges and members of the Par wearing wigs made of horsehair? As a mallei' of fact, artificial locks composed of various kinds of material were familiar to the Egyptians long before the Pyramids were built, but it vfas not until the seventeenth century that wigs at first made of human hair were introduced by the lawyers into England. Paris, that city of all the vanities, was responsible for the innovation. Wigs soon became popular with Bench and Par in. England, but a few of "the. old brigade," notably Chief Justice Hale, strongly objected to them, and still retained the velvet caps, coifs, or corner caps which had been worn by the common law judges for generations'.

Sir Matthew llale not only refused to wear a wig himself, but on various occasions lectured the junior Par on the "foppishness" of their attire when they came into his court wearing that kind of head-dress. These; admonition?, however, apparently had no permanent effect, because!, it soon became evident from the general use of wigs that they had come to slay.

With the growing popularity of tho new fashion, caps fell into disfavour, but a cap is still worn on top of the judicial wig when an English judge passes sentence of death. In that form it is known as the "black cap," and is a relic of the past which has sensibly been allowed to ilisapear in the courts of this State, *

Willi the exception of the black cap, the Supreme Court of New South Wales lias always been careful to keep as far as possible to all the details of judicial attire maintained in the English courts, and has never encouraged movements toward the curtailment of any part of its official costume.

It is a rare occasion when a judge of the court in question, even in the hottest weather, discards his legal head covering; but, curiously enough, one of the judges of the High Court of Australia very often removes his wig immediately' he takes his seat on the Bench, "it is reassuring to know, however, that up to the present nothing alarming has happened as a consequence. The roof of the courtroom is still intact, and there is no record of any honest litigant having been deprived of his legal rights because, his Honour has seen fit to dispense justice without the additional weight on his head of a pound or so of horsehair. It is whispered also that judges of the District Court, when presiding "outback," sometimes relax the conventions and doff their wigs when the thermometer has passed its century and is still piling up runs. By that time nobody is very critical, because the only thing that really matters is whether the biweekly train has arrived with the ice in time to reach the local hotel for the mid-day adjournment. Toward the end of the seventeenth century the wearing of wigs at the Bar was practically universal in England. It was not so, however, across the border. With true Scottish caution, advocates in the "land of cakes" for a long time made no change in their headgear. They continued to wear cocked hats and powdered hair until the middle of the eighteenth century. Before the introduction of wigs in England it was customary for the Lord Chancellor in court, and the Speaker of the House of Commons in Parliament, to wear a hat. Mr Sergeant Bradshaw did the same when presiding at the trial of Charles L, but took the precaution of having his hat, a "big-crowned beaver," lined with, plated steel to ward off possible blows from protesting Royalists. Mr Bradshaw, by taking this precaution, revived in a modified degree the helmet of the armoured knight of the Middle Ages, and anticipated the "tin bat" of modern warfare. Then! is an old story told about Lord Ellenborough and his wig. His wife persuaded him on one occasion to take her with him on circuit, but the Lord Chief justice oulv consented on the understanding that the carriage was not to bo encumbered with bandboxes, which were his pet aversion. All went well on the journey until his Lordship happened to strike his fool against some object under the seat. Up went the window, and out went a bandbox. It fell on the roadside, and was left there. It was not' until Lord Ellenborough and his wife arrived at- the assize' town, many miles farther on, and the Chief Justice began to robe for his court, that he missed his wig. He was then informed that he had thrown it out of the carriage window. History has not recorded what Lord Ellenborough said when he realised what had happened, but it is probable that he relieved his feelings satisfactorily. All judges are human.

Another Chief Justice, Lord Kenyon, was noted for the meaness of his attire and the brevity of his judgments'. He had two hats, the better of which it is said would have disgraced an "old clo' " man, and the oilier might have fittingly adorned a scarecrow. He also possessed two wigs, the shabbier of which he was accustomed to cover in court with one of his hats. The effect must have been ludicrous, and it is safe to say that a judge appearing in court nowadays in similiar guise might, with some justification, cause a certain amount of excitement at the Bar tabic.

Our American cousins, or "uncles" (they jent us quite a lot of money some years ago) have declined to adopt the wig as pint of the trappings of justice in their superior courts, fiy not doing so, they have perhaps gained in comfort but. lost in dignity. After, all, however, it is a matter of opinion, and as our old friend Sir Robert de Coverley used to say, "There is much to be said on both sides."