What is the effect of a consent order on the reading of evidence?

In commenting on the decision of Mr. Justice North, in Blakey v. Shaw, that it was correct not to enter the evidence as read in an order obtained by consent, a commentary in (1887), 31 Sol. J. 555, states the following: But upon the whole the old practice appears to be the best. If the evidence is set out in the order, any dispute as to its having been brought forward is set at rest, and the taxing master is assisted to that extent. It is true that a principle is involved in the question whether on a consent order the evidence should be read; but no court would allow an order taken by consent to be disturbed simply on the ground that the evidence had not been weighed by the court pronouncing the order. [emphasis added]