Y Cymmrodor. v. XIV. 1901.

14 English Laiü in Wales and the Marches.
the English and Welsh side in purely personal actions was
limited to £50, concurrently with the Common Law courts,
but extended to any aniount when the poverty of the
plaintiff was certifìed. Full equitable jurisdiction was also
granted, and the salaries reniained charged on the fìnes
and fees. The agitation to release the "four shires in the
Marches of Wales" continued during the next year, and a
bill was brought in upon a report of a committee of the
Commons in 16 Car., and passed both houses, but never
received the royal assent. The matter dropped during the
Commonwealth and was not revived at the Restoration,
but immediately after the E,evolution the movement
against the Court was renewed, and a petition for its
abolition from ten thousand inhabitants of the towns and
parishes in Wales was presented to Parliament. In it was
given a new suffrage to the litany, " JTrom plague, pestilence,
and the name of Ludlow Court, good Lord deliver
us." In the evidence taken by the Lorcls' Committee in
1689,
it was stated that the Court cost the Crown £3000 a
year, that the judges were judges of the law as well as of
the fact, that the trial was not by jury but "
by English
bill ", tbat there was no appeal from its decisions, that
the costs in the abundant small actions were excessive,
that actions of trespass, damage and small debt were
usually brought there, and that several counties had got
released by Charles II from " pertaining to the Court ".
Sir John Wynne gave it in evidence that land in Wales
was two or three years' purchase the worse because of the
Court. Evidence was also given in favour of the con-
tinuance of the Court. But the result was that 1 Will.
and Mary, cap. 27, abolished altogether " the Court before
the President and Council of the Marches in Wales", as
contrary to the Great Charter, the known laws of the land,
and the birthright of the subject, and declared that the