Advocate Jan 2014

THE ADVOCATE VOL. 72 PART 1 JANUARY 2014
143
FROM OUR
BACK PAGES
By R.C. Tino Bel
If you want to know about court attire generally (from Geoffrey
Chaucer onward), you could not do better than Murray B. Blok’s article
“A Brief History of Court Attire” (2006) 64 Advocate 65. Mr. Blok
chronicles the fascinating history of how lawyers and judges came to
be adorned in gowns and wigs (some indeed became bigwigs).
The wearing of wigs was, of course, abolished in British Columbia in 1905
by An Act Further to Amend the Supreme Court Act, S.B.C. 1905, c. 16. Sadly
there is no Hansard to record exactly how lively the debate over the issue
became. There is some evidence, though, that it did become somewhat spirited.
And so we thought that we could share two articles previously published
in the Advocate on the topic.
The next time you are asked whether you wear a wig to court (and to be
honest, it is surprising how many people do ask this question), you need
not get your knickers in a knot or indeed flip your wig. Instead, you can
recount the entire history of court attire in British Columbia. You can regale
whoever is inquiring as to the nuances of the debate that led to the prohibition
on wigs in this province. And then you can refer them to the two articles
reproduced here, from 1960 and 1984. After that you’ll probably
wonder why no one invites you to parties.
The articles appear on pages 144–148.
t t t
t t