were required by either of the parties to an action at law, it could not be got in the action itself, but a separate suit in equity would have to be instituted in aid of the action at law, or the defence thereto, as the case might be, involving very considerable extra costs. By the Judicature Act, with its fusion of law and equity, the relief can now be obtained in the same action by a simple procedure, but unfortunately it is resorted to sometimes, it is to be feared, when there is no real necessity, and the examinations are apt to be unnecessarily prolix, and the facilities for obtaining this relief are apt to be abused to the prejudice of suitors. Some checks have been attempted to be imposed by disallowance of costs. as between party and party of unnecessary examinations, but what of the client? Even though the opposite party be relieved from liability for such costs, the client on whose behalf the costs are incurred is possibly often required to pay them. The difficulty of preventing the process of the Court being abused is one with which the Court has constantly to contend, and the remedy is not always apparent or efficacious.

Trials and Hearings. In the olden time, trials and hearings of arguments on questions of law could only take place at rare intervals. The justices in Eyre made their visits to the various country parts and tried common law actions always with a jury. Long delays in consequence frequently resulted. Even past the middle of the 19th century the jury was considered an indispensable part of the tribunal at law for the determination of disputed facts, and it is only of late years that at law the jury has become the exception and no longer the rule for the trial of questions of fact in civil cases. Certain classes of action involving a personal element must still in Ontario be tried by a jury, viz., actions for libel, slander, criminal conversation, seduction, malicious arrest, malicious prosecution, and false imprisonment, but in all other kinds of actions it has now become a matter of judicial discretion whether or not a jury shall be allowed. Many cases where facts were undisputed had formerly to wait the regular time of trial, and daily sittings of the Courts for the hearing of actions of law were unknown. It was this infrequency of the sittings of the Courts of law which in some measure contributed to swell the jurisdiction of equity, owing to more frequent sittings of Courts of Equity.

Thus the actions of waste and account, though essentially common law actions, became in course of time almost exclusively to be brought in Chancery. In that Court the hearing of causes, even down to the early part of the 19th century, was, however, a cumbrous affair; the witnesses were within a certain time to be brought up and examined before a special examiner. After the time for giving evidence had expired "publication passed," as the phrase was, and no more evidence could be given except by special leave. The cause was then set down for hearing before a Judge before whom the depositions of the witnesses were read. The examination of witnesses in Court in equity cases before the Judge who tried the case is one of the improvements of the 19th century. Where there were merely formal facts to be proved which were undisputed, they might, before the Judicature Act, be proved by affidavits in Chancery, and may still. Much of the later Chancery practice of hearing causes on the pleadings has been preserved by the Judicature Act. The weekly sittings of the Court for hearing cases pro confesso, or on the pleadings, is a survival of Chancery practice. Its benefits now extend not only to cases where equitable relief is claimed as formerly, but also to cases where merely common law relief is asked.

Among the ancient methods of trial allowed even in civil cases was the wager of battel. Blackstone records that the last trial by battel in the Court of Common Pleas took place in the 13th year of Queen Elizabeth's reign, and was held in Tothill fields near Westminster, but even then, as Sir Henry Spelman mentions, who was himself a witness of the fight, "not without great perturbation among the lawyers." This "battel" took place in a real action. This mode of trial was abolished in England by 59 Geo. III. c. 46, but the writer has not discovered that it has been abolished in this Province except so far as it fell to the ground in civil cases by the abolition of real actions.

Terms formed an important feature of the former legal procedure of the superior Courts of law. These were the times set apart for the sittings of the full Court for the despatch of judicial business. These terms were fixed in the reign of Henry III., and continued without alteration till the time of Henry VIII., in whose reign and that of Charles I. some slight changes were made in their commencement and duration; but for over six centuries they were substantially

maintained. There were four Terms in the year: Hilary, Easter, Trinity, and Michaelmas; Hilary being held in the winter season, Easter in the spring, Trinity in the summer and Michaelmas in the autumn. They were so called after certain feasts of the Christian Church, and were arranged so as to leave people free from the necessity of attendance on the Courts during the observance of the greater Feasts and Fasts of the Church, and the periods when rural avocations were pressing, such as seed time and harvest, etc. The time between the Terms was called Vacation. Each Term was only of two or three weeks' duration, and during that time writs and rules nisi were made returnable and the Judges of each common law Court sat together "in banc," as it was called, for the hearing of demurrers, motions for new trials, or to set aside verdicts, etc., and all applications of a special nature. The judgments of the Court on such motions were always supposed to be given in Term, and when it was necessary to reserve judgment, if the judgment were given in Vacation following the Term the rule or order was nevertheless dated As yet of Term," naming the last preceeding Term in which the case was argued. The inconvenience of confining the judicial business to these stated periods was often felt, and various expedients were resorted to, to get over the difficulty, but it was not until the last century that it was realized that this mode of transacting legal business needed a drastic and radical remedy, and that was the practical abolition of Terms. But it was not until sometime after the Judicature Act that this remedy was applied, and now the almost continuous sittings of Courts throughout the year is seen to be the proper method of administering justice. Our Long Vacation and Christmas Vacation are all that remain to us of the former system of Vacations, and these afford to the Judges and the profession a welcome relaxation from the arduous work in which they are engaged, and at the same time afford relief to suitors. The delay in legal procedure occasioned by Vacations is sometimes the subject of complaint, and there are some who think that a continuous session of the Courts throughout the year, without any intermission for Vacations, would be preferable, but it is open to doubt whether the advantages of that course would not be more than counterbalanced by the many inconveniences which would result from Judges and officers going off on holidays at all sorts of odd and unexpected times.

ORGANIZATION OF A LEGAL BUSINESS.

IX. DEPARTMENTS.

The business done in every law office is capable of division into departments, according to the nature of each transaction. For instance, there is appellate Court work, trial Court work, the preparation of cases for trial, small debts Court, collections, conveyancing, loans, mortgage sales, the accounting, the managing solicitor's work and

80 on.

The matter of the number of departments depends on the size of the business. I know one or two businesses where one man can do all the work he has to do, in less than half a day, and I know other businesses where forty to fifty persons are necessary parts of the machine, and the work is not done when the whistle blows. In some businesses loan company work is so rare that the office boy has to be sent out to borrow a book on mortgage forms. In another business, the proper way to print a case and factum for the Supreme Court of Canada is a matter which has not been dealt with since the business started ten years ago. In still another business all the business is "departmentalized," with a member of the firm in charge of each department. Frequently one man is capable of taking charge of several departments and doing it efficiently.

The point to be made here is this: have some conception of the divisions into which your business falls; don't confuse your business so hopelessly that you don't know to whom to go to learn the position of an action, or to whom to refer a letter for answer. Give each man his work to do; don't give a man two kinds of dissimilar work to do, I mean some collections and some conveyancing; when you have the work apportioned, group the members of the staff doing similar work, and treat each group as a department.

Each department should have a responsible head, thoroughly familiar with the ordinary work of the department, able to assist his staff in their work, possessed of the spirit of reform and capable of putting into operation desirable

methods of work, and generally and efficiently directing the work of the department.

The head of each department should keep in close touch with the work of the staff. Some students require constant supervision; in such a case this can be done by having all work submitted to the head; for instance, the letters dictated by a student can be brought to him for signature; or a deed or affidavit submitted for his "O.K." Another student requires little supervision, but there are always matters in a student's work which are problems to him. In such cases there should always be some one to whom he can go for advice and direction. Herein lies the advantage of having a departmental head. He should be accessible at all times to the members of his department.

The student should make a complete list of all matters in his hands:

"No. 218. A. v. B. Time for defence expires Dec. 31st. "No. 225. C. v. D. To be set down for trial Jan. 12th. "No. 217. G. v. H., Defendant has appealed from Judge's A's order. Appeal to be heard March term, etc."

It is an easy matter to keep this up to date from week to week. This should be typewritten, say on Friday night, at the close of work, copies being made for the managing solicitor, the head of the department, and the student; in this way all concerned are kept advised as to the progress of matter. Nothing is forgotten, and by comparing the list with the previous list, any one conversant with matters can learn whether the student is pushing the work along.

Restrict the work of the office as nearly as possible to the proper departments. For instance, if a real estate matter develops into litigation, transfer it from the real estate department to the proper litigation department, each making entries referring to the fact of transfer, in their docket or record books. When the matter is finally closed, these entries enable the accounting department to render accounts covering the work in all departments through which the matter has passed.

When we say that the work of the office should be restricted to departments, the objection will be raised that some clients require their work to be done only by certain members of the firm. I know a client who insists that even the smallest County Court claims shall be conducted from