The Six Clerks, in a paper given in by them to the Chancery Com missioners of 1825, state that, " From the first establishment of the Six Clerks, up to the rebellion in the reign of King Charles I., many other important duties were attached to their office. During the usurpation, however, a part of the duties was assigned to certain new officers entitled the sworn clerks, who have over since continued the execution thereof." The Six Clerks in this statement have fixed rather too early a date to the legal transfer. Great efforts were made for reform of legal procedure during the Commonwealth. Among others there was an ordinance for abolishing the office of Six-Clerk in 1654, but it terminated, with the other ordinances of the Commonwealth, at the Restoration, and the judges endeavoured vigorously to reinstate the Six Clerks in their old position. Lord Clarendon, in 1665, limited the under-clerks to twelve to each Six-Clerk ; these under-clerks are sometimes referred to incidentally as the "attorneys of the parties," though it is strongly repeated that "the Six Clerks are the only otter ' neys of this court." In 1668 the Six Clerks submitted to their fate ; an order was made fully recognising the under-clerks, and dividing the office-fees between them and the Six Clerks. The Six Clerks, having secured their own monopoly, had, by the year 1688, become the aggressors, and had schemed to increase their income by admittini other persons, as well as the sworn or under-clerks, to practise in their names. This was a boue of contention for many years. Before 169I the under-clerks had obtained the privilege of filling up all the vacancies in the office by taking articled clerks themselves. From this time tilt their abolition, the office of Six-Clerk 'became a complete sinecure, and the Six Clerks were only meutioned in the court's annals with respect to the fees that they are entitled to demand from suitors. The office was abolished by Lord Brougham's Act, which enacted that vacancies should not be filled up till the number of Six Clerks was reduced tc two. Nearly the same story has to be told over again with reference
to the sworn clerks. For a long time these under-clerks were the prin cipal solicitors of the court ; and until the middle of the last century the chief business of the court was transacted by them without the intervention of a solicitor. The same principle of monopoly led with them to nearly the results that it did with their titular superiors. A vested right to fees in the various stages of equity proceedings brought about an inattention to business, which has led to the transfer of the prosecution of suits to the solicitors.
An effort was made in 1825 to get the offices of Six-Clerk and clerk in court abolished. It was broadly stated at this time by a solicitor of celebrity, that Mr. S. (a gentleman whose mind had failed him) was " quite as good a clerk in court after he was a lunatic ;" and the expense of the office to the suitor was insisted on. Lord Eldon, however, saw no reason to interfere with these offices, and they remained condemned by the unanimous voice of the whole profession for many years longer. Ultimately they were abolished, the then holders of the offices receiving compensations so extravagant, that frequent attempts have been made, though unsuccessfully, to reopen the question.
For further information as to this office, the reader is referred to the case " Ex parte the Six Clerks," 3 Vesey's Reports,' 519; to the Reports of the Commissioners on the Offices of Courts of Justice' of 1816; to the 'Report of 1825 of the Chancery Commission;' to Beames's Orders of the Court of Chancery '; to pamphlets by Mr. Spence, Mr. Field, Mr. Merivale, and Mr. Wainewright; and to a powerful speech on Equity Reform, made in the end of the session of 1840, by Mr. Pemberton (now Lord Kingsdown), which was afterwards published in a separate form.