Costello, KevinKevinCostello2014-10-172014-10-172006 Taylo2006-12-01Journal of Legal Historyhttp://hdl.handle.net/10197/6060R. (Martin) v Mahony, a decision of the Irish High Court of 1910, continues to be acknowledged by modern textbook writers as a leading authority for the classical rule that certiorari could not correct error of law. This rule, which considerably reduced judicial superintendence of magistrates' courts, had been established by the English court of Queen's Bench in the 1840s. However, the rule was repudiated by the Exchequer Division in Ireland in the late 1880s, which developed a novel, liberal theory of certiorari. This doctrinal innovation, which was used in overturning convictions under the anti-boycotting statute, the Criminal Law and Procedure Act 1887, appalled sections of Lord Salisbury's government, was disapproved of by the English courts, and split the Irish judiciary. The division caused by the doctrine persisted until 1910 when the Irish High Court, having assembled in banc in Martin's Case in order to resolve the impasse, re-established orthodox English doctrine.enThis is an electronic version of an article published in the Journal of Legal History 27(3): 267-287 (2006). Journal of Legal History is available online at: www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01440360601041126Legal historyLaw and legislationJournal Article27326728710.1080/014403606010411262014-10-05https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ie/