An Act was passed in 1885 under which advocates were called upon
to enroll. In 1886 the following enrolled: David L. Scott, Nicholas Flood
Davin, Wm. Cayley Hamilton, T. C. Johnstone, A. E. Forget, John Secord,
W. P. Sharpe, F. F. Forbes, James Henry Benson, all of Regina; William
Grayson, Moose Jaw; T. C. Down, Broadview; R. B. Gordon, Regina;
Jas. A. Lougheed, J. C. F. Brown, Calgary; G. A. Watson, Edmonton;
John R. Costigan, Calgary; W. Johnson, Moosomin; H. N. Murphy, Fort
Qu'Appelle; J. P. Mitchell, Medicine Hat; R. A. Stevenson, Moosomin;
J.G. Gordon, Moose Jaw; C. N. Campbell, Calgary; E. Saunders, Regina;
F. Cochrane, Calgary; H. I. Everts, Indian Head; A. L. Sifton, Prince
Albert; H. W. Newlands, Prince Albert; W. R. Gunn, Prince Albert; W.
S.Maclise, Prince Albert; J. V. Kildahl, Edmonton; H. Bleecher, Cal-
gary; Stephen Brewster, Prince Albert; W. S. Redpath, Qu'Appelle Sta-
tion; Robert Strachan, Edmonton; A. P. Forget, Battleford; Edouard
Richard, Battleford; C. C. McCaul, Macleod; E. P. Davis, Calgary; R. D.
Strong, Regina; Hayter Reed, Regina; John Pascoe, I. Jephson, T. Ede,
Calgary; W. J. Scott, Battleford; C. W. Peterson, Calgary; W. White,
Moosomin; C. H. Connon, Regina; H. A. J. Macdougall, Wm. Smith, Fort
Qu'Appelle; T. B. Lafferty, Calgary.
In 1887 :-Richard Peake, Calgary; Leslie Gordon, Qu'Appelle Sta-
tion; C. L. Shaw, Edmonton; Jeremiah Travis, Calgary; C. P. Conybeare,
Lethbridge; F. W. G. Haultain, Wm. Gordon, Macleod; James McKay,Prince
Albert; J. A. Priour, Edmonton.
In 1888 -Finmore M. McLeod, Peter McCarthy, W. L. Barnard, Cal-
gary; Severe Gagnon, Regina; J. B. Smith, Calgary. On January 8,1889,
W. A. Galliher, Lethbridge.
Of these today two are Chief Justices (Sir Frederick Haultain and
Judge David L. Scott of Alberta); one has been a Supreme Court Judge,
and is now Governor of Saskatchewan (His Honor the Hon. H. W. New-
lands); one is a Judge of the Supreme Court (Hon. James McKay) ; one
has been leader of the Canadian Senate (Sir James Lougheed), and a
Among those deceased are the Hon. A. L. Sifton (Chief Justice of
Alberta and Minister of the Crown in the War Cabinet); Judge T. C.
Johnstone, Nicholas Flood Davin (M. P. for West Assiniboia), and His
Honor A. E. Forget (first Governor of Saskatchewan).
THE LAW SOCIETY.
The Law Society of the Northwest Territories was founded in 1898
with W. Cayley Hamilton, Q. C., as its president, and Norman Mackenzie
secretary-treasurer, both of Regina. During the lifetime of the Terri-
tories the benchers were, in addition to the two named: N. D. Beck, Q. C.,
Edmonton; Hon. J. A. Lougheed, Q. C., Calgary; C. C. McCaul, Q. C., Cal-
gary; C. P. F. Conybeare, Q. C., Lethbridge; Hon. James McKay, Q. C.,
Prince Albert; Peter McCarthy, Q. C., Calgary; E. L. Elwood, Moosomin;
James Muir, Q. C., Calgary; W. B. Willoughby, Moose Jaw; H. C.
Taylor, Edmonton. Mr. Cayley Hamilton, a man of ability and charac-
ter, died in 1901, and was succeeded as president by Mr. N. D. Beck,
who held the office till the inauguration of the province. Messrs. Norman
Mackenzie, J. A. Lougheed, C. P. F. Conybeare, James McKay and E.
L. Elwood were benchers for the whole period (1898-1907); Mr. McCaul
resigned in 1899; Messrs. James Muir, W. B. Willoughby and H. C. Tay-
lor were elected in 1901 and remained in office till the end.
The first benchers of the Law Society of Saskatchewan were E. L.
Elwood (president 1908); Norman Mackenzie, K. C. (president 1909
and 1919); Frank Ford, K. C.; James Balfour, K. C. (president
C.E. D. Wood (president 1912); W. B. Willoughby, K. C. (president
1910); James McKay, K. C.; H. Acheson (Saskatoon, president 1913);
J. A. M. Patrick, K. C. (Yorkton, president 1911), and 0.S. Black, K.
C. (Weyburn, president 1914). Mr. C. H. Bell was registrar, till 1914,
when he was made a judge and was succeeded by the present registrar,
Mr. J. Kelso Hunter. Most of the benchers have attained distinction.
Of the Territorial benchers associated with Saskatchewan, Hon. James
McKay sat in the House of Commons and is now a Supreme Court Judge;
Mr. E. L. Elwood, greatly honored, died as a Supreme Court Judge; Mr.
Willoughby led the Conservative opposition in Saskatchewan, and is now
a member of the Dominion Senate. Mr. Norman Mackenzie, the first
secretary, has persistently refused office, but probably there is no man in
the province who exercises a greater influence not only as the head of
a great legal house, and by his practical association with powerful busi-
ness interests but by his high personal standing and the confidence felt
in his grasp of affairs, and his ability to advise and direct in situations
of difficulty. He has also a high sense of the artistic, and as a patron of
the arts has filled a valued role in a new country. Another distinguished
hencher is the present Mr. Justice Embury, who was elected in 1913,
served with great distinction in the Great war, rising to the rank of
Brigadier General, and being appointed to a Supreme Court Judgeship
while still on active service. Judge Wood, of Weyburn, who was president
in 1912, deserves high and special mention as a pioneer of distinction.
Coming into the West by way of the Missouri River and Fort Benton, he
served in the Mounted Police, wielded a great influence as a pioneer
editor (Macleod Gazette), then taking up law, becoming president of the
Law Society, and finally a Saskatchewan Judge.
JUSTICES OF THE PEACE.
A pioneer J. P. in the northeast country, asked to write something
about the administration of justice in the early days, was good enough
to send the writer the following:-
"Justice was first administered by the N. W. M. P. and generally
without much red tape. Later, as the country became sparsely settled
J. P.'s were appointed at various points. Some of these men assumed
that they were lawmakers, and gave decisions without considering the
rules of evidence or the limits of their own jurisdiction. I had received
an appointment, but took it somewhat seriously. I consider, at that time
a J. P. had more left-handed power than a judge, as people did not know
enough to appeal, and so their decisions stood, often very unjustly.
"I remember a case when five parties were arrested by a 'Mountie'
and appeared before two J. P.'s for setting different prairie fires. There
was really no evidence, nothing but suspicion. However, the J. P., who
was running the show, fined one of them and adjourned Court, upon
which the Mountie asked what about the other four. The J. P. said he
had forgotten them, but he quickly fined them on the same evidence in
the same amount, with a jail alternative in default. These men had not
even been asked to plead.
"A J. P. asked me to sit on a case with him and before the trial sug-
gested that we commit the accused to jail, as he had no money to pay
a fine. When I pointed out that the man had not yet been tried and
might not be guilty he replied, 'But so and so has just sworn that he
did so and so and I know him to be a reliable man.' When he said this
the J. P. was referring of course to the 'information and complaint.'
This case was dismissed, because I found we had no jurisdiction to try
it. I fully believe that had I not been on the case the man would have
gone to jail.
"An amusing episode occurred at what I think was my first case. It
was a bad prairie fire case. I invited an educated Scotsman, a J. P., to
sit with me~ and it was also his first case. I arranged with him that he
should administer the oath to the witness, while I took down the evi-
dence. In a deep solemn voice he gave the oath in this manner, 'Do
you swear by God to tell the truth and nothing but the truth.' I was
near splitting, but nudged him and whispered the usual form of the oath.
He then altered it to 'Do you swear to tell the truth and nothing but
the truth by God.' No doubt the form would stand, but the way he put
it, it sounded like profanity on his part.
"We ourselves have had experience as a magistrate, and could tell
some stories, but refrain. Although not within our own actual knowl-
edge we vouch for the truth of the following. It concerns a brother
magistrate who was well-known to me. His first call after his appoint-
ment was from a neighbor who wanted to swear an affidavit as a school
trustee. The magistrate's name was Jacob, commonly called Jake. Jake
knew nothing of the form of an oath; so he said to his neighbor: 'Well,
Bill, swear.' 'How shall I swear, Jake?' said Bill. Said Jake: 'You
want to swear this thing don't you, so swear.' 'Well,' said Bill after
a pause, 'By G__________ Jake this thing's alright.' And on that Jake signed
A PHILOLOGISTICAL JUDGMENT.
In the early '90's owing to the great distances, sparse population and
primitive mercantile machinery, criminal law preponderated, and the
duties of the Territorial Judges were largely confined to the trial work.
Appeals were few, and much more personal interest was attached to an
appeal case in the early days than at the present time, where an appeal
is a matter of course.
Mr. Justice McGuire was a man of fine presence, with abundant grey
hair, moustache, and very long side whiskers of the kind that were some-
times called in certain circles "Picadilly weepers." He had an excellent
command of language, but was at times inclined to be pedantic, as the
subjoined instance will show. He delivered judgment in the Territorial
Court en Banc, in June, 1890, in the case of Emerson versus Banner, and
the case is reported in the Old Series of the Northwest Territories Re-
ports. The case involved the validity of a bill of sale as against an
execution subsequently registered. The affidavit of bona fides in the
bill of sale used the words "the creditors" instead of "any creditors," and
a portion of the judgment above referred to is recorded as follows:
"The learned Counsel endeavored to show by syllogistic illustrations
that the use of the words 'the creditors' entirely changed the meaning
of the affidavit, overlooking the fact that in cases of universal negatives
the logicians say that both subject and predicate are distributed. I do
not know that Mr. Bannerman is a logician, or if so, to what school he
belongs; whether to an Ancient or a Modern school; whether he is to be
classed as an Aristotelian, an Epicureau, or a Heraclitic-Protagorean;
whether his mind is of the Rhetoric-Sophistical, or Spenozistic-Meta-
physical, or simply Transcendental-Aesthetic order; or is he, like so
many in these Territories, a lover of Bacon? The evidence does not en-
lighten us on any of these points, nor do I think the omission material.
The power of being able to 'divide a hair twixt south and southwest
side' may be interesting to sophistical rhetoricians who have leisure and
taste for such subtleties. I do not think we should void a bill of sale by
reason of the possibilities suggested here."
We may perhaps take this opportunity of explaining an incident
which was often told on the late Judge Rouleau. The case was reported
and on the face of it, it looks like a humorous paradox. The Judge sen-
tenced a man to three months and told him that if he was guilty he would
have given him two years. The point is that a jury found the man guilty.
As told me by a lawyer who was in Court at the time, the verdict of
guilty was dead against the evidence, and the worthy French Judge had
charged strongly for an acquittal. What Judge Rouleau meant to convey
was this -"The jury have found you guilty and I am bound to accept
the verdict and to pass sentence upon you. I therefore sentence you to
three months, but I do not believe you are guilty. If I did, I would give
you two years and not three months."