[4] The judges who went the Northern Circuit, and to whom a commission to take the assizes at Durham was directed, were judges of the court, and continued to be so, until another commission, directed to other judges, was issued for the next subsequent assizes; during which time, besides trying causes at the assizes, they held courts from time to time in London, for the purpose of granting and deciding upon rules, etc.

And the judges of the court for the time being could make rules for regulating the proceedings in actions, and the mode and time of pleading;[5] or they or any two of them could adopt any such rules made by any of the superior courts at Westminster.

[11] Nothing contained in section 1 of the Durham (County Palatine) Act 1836 prejudiced or affected the jurisdiction of this court.

[16] The costs for preparing pleadings in actions here, were by express enactment made the same as those of a like description in the Superior Courts.

[17] Provisions were made as to the costs with respect to the admission upon the trial of written and printed documents, and copies;[18] taxation of costs;[19] costs on paying money into Court;[20] fees to the officers;[21] costs on motions for new trials in the Superior Courts;[22] on removal of judgments;[23] removal of causes;[24] on writs of false judgment;[25] and as to the expenses of witnesses;[26] and any rule of Court made here, could be made a rule of any of the Superior Courts of Law at Westminster.

3. c. 21[30] As to order of Court of Pleas for examination of witnesses and interrogatories, see the Evidence by Commission Act 1831 (1 Will.

As to duties and salaries of Clerks of the Crown in Durham, see the Criminal Justice Act 1856 (19 & 20 Vict.

[31] This provision was repealed and replaced by section 18(2)(a)(vi) of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925, which was to the same effect.