1836. While he was still below the bar he laid the foundation of his success in life by his ‘Practical Treatise of the Law of Vendors and Purchasers of Estates,’ London, 1805, 8vo, a work which became the standard textbook on its subject; it reached a fourteenth edition in 1862.
Upon his call Sugden united court with chamber practice, and was soon retained, as a matter of course, in all cases of importance, whether in the common law or the chancery courts, which turned on the construction of wills or deeds. His profound knowledge of the technique of conveyancing is displayed in his ‘Practical Treatise of Powers,’ London, 1808, 8vo (8th edit. 1861), and his learned edition of Gilbert's ‘Law of Uses and Trusts’ [Gilbert, Sir Geoffrey or Jeffray]. His diligence was unremitting, his mastery of his speciality unrivalled, his physical strength prodigious. Already, in 1817, he held a commanding position at the bar, and in Hilary term 1822 Lord Eldon conferred upon him the then very rare distinction of a silk gown. After several unsuccessful attempts to enter parliament he was returned in the tory interest on 20 Feb. 1828 for Weymouth and Melcombe Regis, Dorset, which seat he retained on his appointment to the office of solicitor-general, when he was knighted, 4 June 1829, and at the general election of August 1830.
In the House of Commons Sugden carried some minor, but useful measures, chiefly relating to the law of trusts and wills, viz. 1 Will. IV, cc. 36, 40, 46, 47, 60, 65, and 2 Will. IV, c. 58, 5, and 6 Will. IV, cc. 16, 17 (Sir E. B. Sugden's Acts, ed. Atkinson, London, 1830, 8vo). A strong protestant, he gave a reluctant support to catholic emancipation as a political necessity; but in the debate on the Clare election (18 May 1829) he advocated the exclusion of O'Connell from the house. On the formation of Earl Grey's administration he was succeeded as solicitor-general (26 Nov. 1830) by Sir William Horne [q. v.]; nor did he again take minor office. In the parliament of 1831–2 he represented St. Mawes, Cornwall, after which he was without a seat until 1837, when he was returned, 24 July, for Ripon, Yorkshire. The elevation of Brougham to the woolsack Sugden viewed with the disgust natural to a consummate lawyer, and vented his spleen in a peculiarly bitter bon mot. ‘If,’ he said, ‘the lord chancellor only knew a little law, he would know a little of everything.’ He had no faith in Brougham's projects for the reform of the complicated system of which Brougham understood so little. He was vexed by his apparent inattention in court. While Sugden was discoursing of such matters as scintilla juris or the doctrine of springing uses, the lord chancellor sometimes seemed to be writing letters or an article for the ‘Edinburgh Review,’ or perusing papers disconnected with the case. On one such occasion Sugden fairly lost patience and paused in his argument until Brougham, hardly raising his eyes from his papers, bade him continue. An altercation then ensued, Sugden complaining that the lord chancellor did not give him his attention, and Brougham replying that he was merely signing formal documents, and that Sir Edward might as well object to his taking snuff or blowing his nose. In the end Sugden sat down, having administered a reproof which, though treated for the time with nonchalance, was not wholly lost upon the chancellor. Less discreet was an attempt which he made to embarrass the chancellor in parliament. Brougham had conferred, provisionally, as it afterwards appeared, a certain chancery sinecure upon his brother. Sugden asked a pointed question on the subject in the House of Commons. Incensed at what he not unnaturally deemed a malignant insinuation of jobbery, Brougham made a veiled attack upon Sugden in the House of Lords, in a style so peculiarly offensive that it was impossible for the House of Commons to ignore it (25–27 July 1832). Feeling that he had gone too far, Brougham afterwards offered Sugden a place on the exchequer bench, and, when he declined it, made him a private apology, which, being at once accepted, laid the basis of a durable friendship (Misrepresentations in Campbell's Lives of Lyndhurst and Brougham corrected by Lord St. Leonards, 1869, 8vo).
Sugden held the great seal of Ireland in Sir Robert Peel's first administration, being sworn of the privy council on 16 Dec. 1834. The advent of a stranger was at first resented by the Irish bar; but, though his tenure of office was of the briefest—the government fell in April 1835—his great judicial qualities were soon cordially appreciated, and his departure was viewed with regret. On the question of privilege involved in the case of Stockdale v. Hansard, Sugden, in supporting the jurisdiction of the queen's bench (17 June 1839, 7 Feb., 5 March 1840), only expressed the general sense of the legal profession [see Denman, Thomas, first Lord Denman]. He again held the great seal of Ireland in Peel's second administration (3 Oct. 1841–July 1846), during which period he conferred on chancery suitors the boon of a systematic code of procedure. By cancelling the commissions of certain magistrates who had countenanced the agitation for repeal of the union, he gave great
