There were formerly other local Courts in the metropolis outside the privileged boundary of the "City:" the various Courts of Request, and the celebrated Palace Court, with a jurisdiction in some respects resembling the Lord Mayor's Court, and, like that Court, under its original constitution, having only a limited number of privileged counsel and attorneys. The old Courts of Request were swept away by the County Courts Acts. The Palace Court survived, and owed its subseqent downfall to the accident of an energetic writer for the public press having been sued there, and in consequence brought about a clamour for its abatement as a nuisance. remain, therefore, only among the inferior Courts of civil jurisdiction within the metropolis whose powers conflict with the County Courts, the Courts of the "City," already referred to, and a Court connected with the "City," in Southwark, called the "Borough Court of Record." *

There

The criminal jurisdiction within the metropolis is divided among a number of Courts. Of these, the Central Criminal Court deserves the first mention. Its jurisdiction extends to all places within ten miles of St. Paul's, including not only London and Middlesex, but parts of Hertfordshire, Kent, Essex, and Surrey, and is usually held once a month, its sittings extending to six or seven days. In its origin this Court was but the Court of Oyer and Terminer for the City of London, and of the delivery of the gaol of Newgate of prisoners taken there by the civic authorities. Parliament was induced in 1834 to give this Court the very extensive jurisdiction it now enjoys; and the judicial staff is a very efficient one, consisting of two of the Judges of Westminster Hall, the Recorder and Common Serjeant of London, and the Judge of the City Sheriffs' Court; but the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City are part of the legal constitution of the Court, and though these gentlemen rarely take any part in the actual proceedings

This Court has very little business. It is held before an officer of the Corporation of London, called the Steward of Southwark.

at the trials, delay and inconvenience is sometimes occasioned by their non-attendance, as their presence is generally essential to form a Court.

Though the metropolis has thus the advantage of a Central Criminal Court, yet the jurisdiction of this tribunal is divided with the various Courts of Assize and Quarter Sessions for those counties, and for the Cities of London and Westminster, Borough of Southwark, and Tower of London. It is true some of these Courts are fallen into desuetude, but the Surrey and Middlesex Sessions take a host of cases which could with much more advantage to the public be taken at the Central Criminal Court. Under the present arrangements there is occasionally an advantage on the part of a lucky thief in getting off in the scramble, by the engagement of the police in another Court; but to all others concerned-the jury, witnesses, and professional menthe inconvenience of having several Courts sitting in different places for the same purpose is an unmitigated evil.

As already observed, there are in the metropolis eleven Police Courts, and by virtue of the Summary Jurisdiction Acts these Courts possess a very important jurisdiction. The presiding officers are Magistrates, whose qualification is prescribed by the Legislature. Such Courts were first established in the metropolis seventy years ago by Mr. Pitt, as a remedy for the evils formerly practised by Justices of the Peace in London. The Metropolitan Police Courts, as they are now constituted, were established by the Act 3 & 4 Vict., c. 84, which authorises the appointment of twenty-seven Police Magistrates,* but omits the "City," and within this excepted portion of the metropolis, the powers and duties of Police Magistrates still belong to the Aldermen.

* At present only twenty-three Police Magistrates have been appointed for the Metropolis. The Act extends only to the Metropolitan Police District, and the "City" is not within this. The abolition of a separate system of police and Police Magistrates within the "City" has been repeatedly recommended to Parliament; but the Corporation hitherto have had influence enough to defeat this very desirable reformation.

The other business belonging to the office of honorary Magistrates, but which does not come within the jurisdiction of the Police Courts, is transacted throughout the metropolis in Petty Sessions, according to the districts in which it occurs, by the various Justices of the Peace for the "City," and the counties of Middlesex, Surrey, Kent, or Essex.

In London, of all places in the world, waste of time is the waste which is most felt. In the multiplicity of our present metropolitan tribunals, and the want of system in the order and distribution of the business we have at present, notwithstanding the ample supply of Judges, Magistrates, and Jurymen of every class, delays and consequent expenses in the procedure both of civil and criminal cases which might be easily saved, to the advantage of all concerned.

In the first place, why should there not be one Nisi Prius Court for the whole metropolitan area, to which could be sent the records from all the Courts entered for trial in London? If this Court were sitting continuously, with the interval only of the Long Vacation, and a proper arrangement were made of the causes entered, so as to ensure a proper order of trial, it would require but two of the Judges at the utmost to dispose of the whole Nisi Prius business-and, indeed, for a greater portion of the time, the services of one Judge would be sufficient.

At the time of entering any cause for trial at this Metropolitan Nisi Prius Court, a certificate might be required so as to guide the officer in arranging the list: and separate lists might be most advantageously made of the causes so entered, 1st, Cases certified to be short and undefended. 2ndly, Cases agreed to be tried by the Judge without a Jury, or when the facts were undisputed. 3rdly, Revenue Cases. 4thly, Mercantile Cases to be tried by a jury of merchants. 5thly, ordinary Common Jury cases. 6thly, Special Jury cases. 7thly, such cases as were not certified to be London cases. By postponing the last class of cases till after those properly belonging to the metropolis were disposed of, a very great abuse

of the present system of Nisi Prius trials in London would be got rid of, and the other suggestions as to the classification of the cases would, with the aid of some amendments in the Jury regulations, cause a very great improvement in our Nisi Prius trials, which at present are often a mere scramble, and as unsatisfactory as they are costly. These improvements could be more effectually carried out by causes being always entered and notice of trial given for ten days after the date of such notice, whenever that might expire.

In like manner, with regard to the Criminal and Quarter Sessions Courts within the metropolitan area, the substitution of one Court could be most advantageously made. If, in lieu of the monthly Sessions of the Central Criminal Court and the sittings of the various Metropolitan Sessions, there were one continuous Metropolitan Sessions always sitting (with the interval of a short vacation) and the business of the Court so arranged as to take the cases in a certain order, according to their character and importance, the whole Criminal and Sessions business of the metropolis would be disposed of with the greatest facility, and with the greatest advantage to the community. The Judges from Westminster Hall need not be required to attend more frequently than they do at present; the staff of other Metropolitan Judges, including the Recorder, Common Serjeant, Judges of the Middlesex Sessions, &c., would suffice to dispose of the whole Sessions business of the metropolis in respect of the trials of criminals and the hearing of appeals; and there are the Metropolitan Police Magistrates, whose names could be placed in the Commission with more advantage to the public than those of the Aldermen of the "City," who very properly at present are allowed to take no part in the business of criminal trials, though obliged to attend in their places.

One of the most important consequences of such a consolidation of our Metropolitan Tribunals would be the relief of those who have to serve on Juries. The present regulations affecting Jurymen in the metropolis are most unsatisfactory. Among the

360,000 householders in the metropolis, we have such a staff of qualified Jurymen of every grade as would, under a proper system of regulations, render it unnecessary for any individual to serve for more than one week every five years, and at the same time give a most complete supply for all the requisites of justice. Why could not the names returned as Jurymen within the metropolitan area be classified into lists,-1st, of Common Jurymen; 2nd, of Merchants; 3rd of Special Jurymen; 4th, of Grand Jurymen; such lists to be annually revised by the Revising Barristers, and no name to be entered on more than one list. By such a regulation, we should always have a constant supply of every class of Jurymen, without imposing on them any of the hardships so loudly complained of. At the present time, a tradesman in Oxford Street, with a counting-house in the "City," and a country residence at Clapham, may be called on to serve in half a dozen different places, in one case as a Common Juryman, and in others as a Special Juryman or Grand Juryman. Were the demands on the time of Jurymen so reduced, the regulations for enforcing their attendance might be made more stringent, and the public time would not so often be wasted, and the expenses of litigation enhanced by causes going off pro defectu Juratorum.

With regard to the Grand Jury within the metropolis, it has long been an expressed opinion on the part of all persons competent to judge, that in cases already investigated by qualified Police Magistrates, their interference is worse than useless. Hardly any change in the procedure of our criminal courts would be more conducive to order in the trials than such a dispensation with the services of the Grand Jury. The cases could thus be always reduced into lists, and taken in their order, to the great convenience and advantage of every one concerned, and the furtherance of the course of justice. The

On the last discussion on this subject in Parliament, the principal objection to the dispensation of the services of the Grand Jury, in cases sent for trial by the Metropolitan Magistrates, was, that some of those cases were sent by the City Aldermen.