seamus dubhghaill

Promoting Irish Culture and History from Little Rock, Arkansas, USA

Tag Archives: Exchequer of Pleas


by Leave a comment

Death of Sir James Shaw Willes

Sir James Shaw Willes, a judge of the English Court of Common Pleas, kills himself at his residence near Watford, Hertfordshire, England, on October 2, 1872, while suffering a nervous breakdown.

Willes is born on February 13, 1814, in Cork, County Cork, the eldest among six children of James Willes, physician, and his wife, Elizabeth Aldworth, daughter of John Shaw, mayor of Cork in 1792. Educated at Dr. Porter’s school in Cork and Trinity College Dublin (TCD), he graduates BA in 1836, having entered the King’s Inns the previous year. In 1837, he goes to London and joins the Inner Temple as a pupil of the noted barrister Thomas Chitty (1802–78), in whose chambers he remains as a salaried assistant and special pleader before being called to the English bar on June 12, 1840. The Willes and Chitty families are connected, and James’s younger sister, Mary, later marries Thomas Chitty’s son.

Willes joins the home circuit, though his practice is chiefly in London in mercantile and maritime law. A leading junior in the Court of Exchequer, he holds the post of tubman from 1851, an honorary position in the gift of the Lord Chief Baron. Known for his erudition, he is persuaded to edit, with Sir Henry Singer Keating, the third and fourth editions of John William Smith‘s Leading Cases (1849, 1856). In 1850, his reputation is such that he is appointed one of the commissioners to draft the common law procedure bill (1854) and is credited with having effected most of the reform therein. On July 3, 1855, he is appointed judge of the Court of Common Pleas, though he has not yet taken silk and is only 41, the youngest lawyer but one to have been appointed to the bench since 1778.

A classical scholar and linguist who knows oriental as well as European languages, who travels widely, loves poetry, and frequents literary men, and whose judgments are clear and philosophical, Willes is accounted among the best common law judges of his day, and is celebrated for the simplicity and lucidity of his style. Notable judgments include Esposito v. Bowden (1857), which lays down that the force of a declaration of war is equal to that of an act of parliament prohibiting commercial transactions with the enemy. In the law of torts, he gives an oft-cited judgment in the case of Indermaur v. Dames (1866), which has been accepted almost as statutory, on the liability of the occupier of a building for the safety of a visitor. In 1868, as one of the first judges appointed to try election petitions, he lays down the rules of practice generally followed afterward. A strong British patriot, he serves in the Inns of Court Volunteers from 1859 until shortly before his death.

On November 3, 1871, Willes is sworn of the privy council. However, his health has deteriorated through overwork and an emotional temperament, and he has long suffered heart disease and gout. In August 1872, after a heavy assize at Liverpool, he returns to his house, Otterspool, Watford, Hertfordshire, and succumbs to a nervous breakdown, which leads to his shooting himself on October 2, 1872. He is buried on October 7 at Brompton Cemetery in London. He is survived fifteen years by his wife, Helen, daughter of Thomas Jennings of Cork, whom he married on May 17, 1856. There have no children.

A tall, reserved man, with a prominent nose and sad eyes, Willes has great affection for children and animals and is singularly emotional. He is known to return to his room and shed tears before passing sentence on a criminal. He never loses his Irish accent. His marriage is allegedly unhappy, as he had been forced into it after he had fallen out of love. Sir Frederick Pollock (1845–1937), author of the magisterial History of English Law before the Time of Edward I and sometime marshal to Willes, dedicates to him his first textbook on torts in 1879, writing that he was “one of those whose knowledge is radiant and kindles answering fire.” A century later, A. W. B. Simpson maintains that “his reputation as a jurist will last as long as the law reports of England are read.”

(From: “Willes, Sir James Shaw” by Bridget Hourican, Dictionary of Irish Biography, http://www.dib.ie, October 2009)


by Leave a comment

Repeal of the Declaratory Act 1719

The Declaratory Act 1719, which had given Great Britain the right to legislate for Ireland and had denied the appellate jurisdiction of the Irish House of Lords, is repealed on June 21, 1782.

An Act for the better securing the dependency of the Kingdom of Ireland on the Crown of Great Britain (long title) is an Act passed by the Parliament of Great Britain which declares that it has the right to pass laws for the Kingdom of Ireland, and that the British House of Lords has appellate jurisdiction for Irish court cases. It becomes known as the Declaratory Act, and opponents in the Irish Patriot Party refer to it as the Sixth of George I, from the regnal year it is passed. Legal and political historians have also called it the Dependency of Ireland on Great Britain Act 1719 or the Irish Parliament Act, 1719. Prompted by a routine Irish lawsuit, it is aimed at resolving the long-running dispute between the British and the Irish House of Lords as to which is the final court of appeal from the Irish Courts. Along with Poynings’ Law, the Declaratory Act becomes a symbol of the subservience of the Parliament of Ireland, and its repeal is long an aim of Irish statesmen, which is finally achieved for Anglican Irish as part of the Constitution of 1782.

In 1709, the Irish Court of Exchequer hears a lawsuit between Maurice Annesley and his cousin Hester Sherlock over which of them have the right to possession of certain lands at Naas, County Kildare. The court finds in Annesley’s favour. Mrs. Sherlock appeals to the Irish House of Lords which upholds her appeal. Annesley then invokes the long-disputed jurisdiction of the British House of Lords to hear appeals from the Irish courts, and that house pronounces in his favour. The Court of Exchequer duly complies with the decree of the British House, but Mrs. Sherlock appeals again to the Irish house, which orders the Barons of the Exchequer to comply with its own decree and, when they refuse, imprison them for contempt of Court. The political uproar is out of all proportion to the importance of the lawsuit itself.

The bill has its second reading in the Commons on March 4, 1719, where it is chiefly opposed on the grounds that it appears to have no purpose beyond increasing the power of the House of Lords. Other objections include an argument that the preamble and the enacting section of the bill are contradictory, and that Ireland has historically had an independent judiciary. It is supported by Joseph Jekyll and Philip Yorke, and carries 140 votes to 83. It is then passed on March 26, 1719.

Section I of the Act notes that the Irish House of Lords had recently “assumed to themselves a Power and Jurisdiction to examine, correct and amend” judgements of the Irish courts, which it holds to be illegal. As such, it declares that the Kingdom of Ireland is subordinate to and dependent upon the British crown, and that the King, with the advice and consent of the Parliament of Great Britain, has “full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient validity to bind the Kingdom and people of Ireland.” Section II declares that the House of Lords of Ireland has no jurisdiction to judge, affirm or reverse any judgement, sentence or decree made in any court within the Kingdom of Ireland, and that all proceedings before the House upon any such matter are declared to be null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever.

The Irish House of Lords is understandably infuriated by the curtailment of its powers, and the Barons of the Exchequer, though they are soon released from custody, are subject to intense vilification. While many people think that the Irish House of Lords had brought about the crisis by its own high-handed behaviour, the “Sixth of George I” remains a source of grievance for decades.

The Declaratory Act 1719 provides a model for the American Colonies Act 1766, which is also known as the “Declaratory Act” and is a similar source of grievance in the Thirteen Colonies. The British defeat in the subsequent American Revolutionary War prompts a more conciliatory tone towards Ireland, and the Declaratory Act 1719 is repealed in its entirety when the Repeal of Act for Securing Dependence of Ireland Act 1782 receives royal assent on June 21, 1782.