[6] Since the great "bedchamber question" of 1839 the settled
practice has been for all the ladies of the court except the mistress
of the robes to receive and continue in their appointments
independently of the political connexions of their husbands, fathers
and brothers (see Gladstone's _Gleanings of Past Years_, i. 40; and
Torrens's _Memoirs of Lord Melbourne_, ii. 304).
LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, in England, the presiding judge of the king's bench
division of the High Court of Justice, and in the absence of the lord
chancellor, president of the High Court. He traces his descent from the
justiciar of the Norman kings. This officer appears first as the
lieutenant or deputy of the king, exercising all the functions of the
regal office in the absence of the sovereign. "In this capacity William
Fitz-Osbern, the steward of Normandy, and Odo of Bayeux, acted during
the Conqueror's visit to the continent in 1067; they were left,
according to William of Poitiers, the former to govern the north of
England, the latter to hold rule in Kent, vice sua; Florence of
Worcester describes them as "custodes Angliae," and Ordericus Vitalis
gives to their office the name of "praefectura." It would seem most
probable that William Fitz-Osbern at least was left in his character of
steward, and that the Norman seneschalship was thus the origin of the
English justiciarship" (Stubbs's _Constitutional History_, i. 346). The
same authority observes that William of Warenne and Richard Clare
(Bienfaite), who were left in charge of England in 1074, are named by a
writer in the next generation "praecipui Angliae justitiarii"; but he
considers the name to have not yet been definitely attached to any
particular office, and that there is no evidence to show that officers
appointed to this trust exercised any functions at all when the king was
at home, or in his absence exercised supreme judicial authority to the
exclusion of other high officers of the court. The office became
permanent in the reign of William Rufus, and in the hands of Ranulf
Flambard it became coextensive with the supreme powers of government.
But it was not till the reign of Henry II. that the chief officer of the
crown acquired the exclusive right to the title of _capitalis_ or
_totius Angliae justitiarius_. Stubbs considers that the English form of
the office is to be accounted for by the king's desire to prevent the
administration falling into the hands of an hereditary noble. The early
justiciars were clerics, in whom the possession of power could not
become hereditary. The justiciar continued to be the chief officer of
state, next to the king, until the fall of Hubert de Burgh (in the reign
of King John), described by Stubbs as the last of the great justiciars.
Henceforward, according to Stubbs, the office may be said to have
survived only in the judicial functions, which were merely part of the
official character of the chief justiciar. He was at the head of the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account