of him, was called Trent's Town, the name by which it was originally known. It had before, says Smith, been significantly called "Little Worth." It was, however, at the death of the Chief Justice, a town only in name-containing, as it did, but two or three houses. The spot on which the City Hall now stands, was then in the midst of a dense woods, through which a solitary foot-path wound its way to the old mill-then called Stacey's, but now known as Waln's Mill. In 1719, the Courts for the County of Hunterdon were held here for the first time. Trent presented to the county the lot on which the first Court House was built. It was the lot now owned by the Trenton Banking Company, and on which their banking house stands. It was not until 1790, that Trenton was made the seat of government of New Jersey.1 In tracing the history of our Courts, we have come to the administration of Governor Burnet; and it seems to be a fitting place in which to speak of the Court of Chancery. For we are told it was a Court in which Governor Burnet took especial delight, and in which he loved to display his parts; 1 Barber and Howe's N. J. Hist. Col., 283. The historical notice of Trenton contained in this work, is taken from a series of articles, origi nally published in the Trenton State Gazette, and written by the Rev. Eli F. Cooley, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Ewing. and although no lawyer,' yet being a man of books, and fond of the society of men of letters, he is said to have made in it a very respectable figure.2 The Court of Chancery, for some reason or other, seems never to have been a popular favorite He In the Encyclopædia Americana, II. 336, Governor Burnet is said to have been " originally bred to the law." But however this may be, he never pursued his profession. was the eldest son of the celebrated Bishop Burnet, and was born at the Hague in March, 1688. He was named after William the Prince of Orange, who stood his godfather. His fortune, which was at one time considerable, was wrecked in the South Sea scheme, and like most royal Governors, he was poor when he came to this country. The love of money, however, was a vice from which he was entirely free, and he carried nothing away with him but his books. In 1728, he was removed from the government of New York and New Jersey, and transferred to that of Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Although the son of a bishop, and said to have been a man of piety, yet he was of a convivial disposition, and by no means distinguished by his seriousness of character. His levity shocked the good people of New England. Upon one occasion, he was dining with an old charter senator, and being asked, whether it would be most agreeable to his Excellency that grace should be said standing or sitting; the gov ernor replied, "Standing or sitting, any way or no way, just as you please." A deputation was sent to conduct him in state to his new government. They met him on the borders of Rhode Island. He complained of the long graces that were said by the clergymen on the road, and asked when they would shorten. One of the committee, the facetious Colonel Tayler, answered, "The graces will increase in length till you come to Boston; after that, they will shorten till you come to your government of New Hampshire, where your Excellency will find no grace at all." He died in September, 1729, from the effects of a violent cold contracted by the oversetting of his carriage upon the causeway at Cambridge. He was a man of superior talents, and of an amiable character. He published some astronomical observations in the transactions of the Royal Society, and an essay on scripture prophecy.— Allen's Biog. Dic. Belknap. Hutchinson. Grahame. 2 Smith's N. Y. 240. Governor Burnet however had one foible, which would seem to have disqualified him in some measure, for the duties of a Chancellor. He used to say of himself, "I act first, and think afterwards." in this country.' The large discretionary power which it is thought to confer upon one man; the fact that the people appear to be in some measure excluded from it; and that it altogether dispenses with the cherished mode of trial by jury, may perhaps account for the prejudice entertained towards it. The early annals of New York and Pennsylvania, abound with manifestations of the jealousy and distrust with which this tribunal was regarded. It was in 1711, that Governor Hunter first began to exercise the office of Chancellor in New York; but it was made a subject of constant complaint and remonstrance by the Assembly; and so unpopular 1 Even in England the Court of Chancery has never been a popular tribunal. It has at least always been deemed a fair subject for the pen of the satirist. Butler, who indeed spared nothing, thus writes: "Does not in Chancery every man swear, Swift represents Gulliver as having costs. Even the learned Selden thus speaks: "Equity is a roguish thing: for law we have a measure-know what to trust to; equity is according to the conscience of him that is Chancellor, and as that is larger or narrower, so is equity. It is all one as if they should make the standard of the measure we call a foot, a Chancellor's foot; what an uncertain measure would this be! One Chancellor has a long foot, another a short foot, a third an indifferent foot: it is the same thing in the Chancellor's conscience."-Selden's Table-Talk. In fact, it was not until near the close of the reign of Charles II. that the Court of Chancery was entitled to much respect. Lord Chancellor Nottingham, who died in 1682, has been called the Father of Equity. He it was, who first reduced it to a regular and cultivated science; and redeemed it from the disgrace of being supposed to depend upon the individual opinion or caprice of the Chancellor.-Lives of the Lord Chancellors, III. 329. Am. ed. In did it become in that Province, that little or no business was transacted in it for many years. 1727, it was resolved by the House of Assembly, that the erection of a Court of Chancery in that Colony, without the consent of the General Assembly, was unwarrantable and illegal, a manifest oppression and grievance to the people, and of pernicious consequence to their liberties and properties. An ordinance was soon after passed to remedy the abuses of the Court, and reduce the fees of its officers; and from that time, until 1756-when William Smith wrote his History of New York-we are informed that the wheels of the Chancery rusted upon their axles, and that its practice was contemned by all gentlemen of eminence in the profession.1 In 1720, a Court of Chancery was first established in Pennsylvania, by Governor Keith, with the concurrence of the Council and Assembly. It was declared to be absolutely necessary in the administration of justice, for the purpose of mitigating the rigor of the law, whose judgments are tied down to fixed and unalterable rules, and for opening the way to the right and equity of a cause, for which the law cannot in all cases make a sufficient provision. But it happened, unfortunately, a few 1 Smith's N. Y., 270. 'Proud's Pa., II. 126. years afterwards, that John Kinsey, a Quaker lawyer of eminence, and afterwards Chief Justice of that Province, having occasion to transact business in the Court, appeared with his hat on his head, as was the custom with members of his society. The Chancellor, Sir William Keith, who stood much upon form, ordered his hat to be taken off; which was accordingly done by one of the officers of the Court. This gave great offence to the Quakers ; insomuch, that at a Quarterly Meeting, held in the City of Philadelphia, a committee was appointed to wait upon the Governor, and present to him an address, in which they gravely complain of the act in question, as a direct infringement of their rights and liberties. And such was the excitement produced, and so loud the clamor that was raised, that the Chancellor found it necessary to make a solemn order, by which it was provided, that it should be a standing rule of the Court of Chancery, for the Province of Pennsylvania, in all time to come, that any person professing to be one of the people called Quakers, should be permitted to address the Court, without being obliged to observe the usual ceremony of uncovering his head. But however satisfactory this concession may have been deemed 1 Proud's Pa., II. 197. |