LORD BROUGHAMhaving laid on the table a Bill, to alter and amend an Act of the fifteenth year of Her present Majesty, for amending the Law of Evidence in Scotland, expressed his regret that his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack (Lord Cranworth) should have made his statement on law reform in his (Lord Brougham's) absence, because, as the noble and learned Lord had made objections to one of his (Lord Brougham's) measures, he felt it necessary, on the first opportunity, to defend it. No doubt it was very gratifying 177 to the friends of law amendment to see the forces of the Government directed to that subject; but when they found those forces going neither backward nor forward, but merely performing the operation of "marking time," seeming to move when they did not advance at all, they felt suspicion and alarm. He was afraid that there was something in the statement of his noble and learned Friend that looked like "marking time." The very few measures which he had announced were, however, important; but of these the most important was the digest of the law. He (Lord Brougham) must say, that the conduct of the late Government, in adopting the digest of criminal law, recommended by the Criminal Law Commission, and embodied in each of his (Lord Brougham's) Bills of 1845, 1848, and 1850, had his (Lord Brougham's) warmest approbation. With respect to trial by jury, God forbid that any attempt should be made to abolish it. Nor was that proposed in the Bill he had presented last November. What was proposed was, that the parties should have an option; and he might even agree that they should not have the option in cases of tort. He admitted that it would require great consideration as to the extent to which this enactment should be carried. But what had experience shown in the county courts? Why, that in only three cases out of 100 where the parties had the option of having a jury or taking the opinion of the Judge, had the parties chosen to have their cases tried by a jury. There were one or two other subjects on which he wished to express an opinion, but when the Bills were brought in, he should have abundant opportunity of discussing them. He hoped his noble and learned Friend would apply his mind to other matters, as well as those upon which he had given notice of his intention to proceed; and such was his entire confidence in the good sense, learning, and experience of his noble and learned Friend, that he felt assured he would treat them in accordance with those sound, rational, and moderate views which he was known to entertain.
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he could assure their Lordships, and his noble and learned Friend in particular, that no one in that House regretted more than he did that he had felt bound to make that statement on a day when his noble and learned Friend was not present in his place. But he would observe, it might well have been supposed out of doors that 178 he wanted to "mark time" instead of advancing, if he had not taken the very earliest opportunity of stating to their Lordships, and through their Lordships to the country, what were the intentions of the Government on the important subject of law reform. Had he known that his noble and learned Friend would so soon be in the House, he might, perhaps, have been induced to make that statement somewhat later. He took some blame to himself that he did not make the inquiry; but it did not occur to him that his noble and learned Friend, who was so seldom absent from his place, would not be there, so he gave notice on the first night of the Session that on Monday he would make the statement which he then did. He regretted his noble and learned Friend was not present, because he felt persuaded he would have seen that he (the Lord Chancellor) exhibited no intention of "marking time," but of advancing, as he was sure his noble and learned Friend would wish him to do, safely and surely. He had announced his intention of immediately proceeding with the Registration Bill, amended, he hoped, but certainly laboriously considered by him. He stated also that the Charitable Trusts Bill, which was not exactly the same as the Bill introduced a Session or two ago, was in such a state of progress that he hoped in a short time to lay it on the table of the House; and he showed that, having the means, he intended practically and at once to proceed with the digest of the statute law. Surely, then, he could not be said to be merely "marking time." With regard to the observations of his noble and learned Friend on the question now before the Common Law Commission, as to the advisability of giving the option of trial by jury not, if he had been represented as pledging himself against that proposition, he had either not expressed what he meant, or had been misunderstood. He merely said it required the gravest consideration, because, admitting that many questions, such as those relating to common debts, might be ordinarily, safely, and perhaps better tried and decided by a Judge, without the intervention of a jury—assuming that, he yet felt very strongly the advantage arising to the numerous body who performed the duties of jurymen at assizes, and who invariably left the Court more intelligent than when they entered it. He therefore thought they ought not to make any change without looking at the question in every point of view. So far 179 from having come to any determination not to adopt the same view as his noble and learned Friend, he might be brought to think that the advantage of a cheaper trial might be greater than the disadvantage of mixing up duties in the administration of justice. There was no man in the country who felt more sensibly than he did the great debt which the country owed to his noble and learned Friend for all he had done, by his surpassing zeal and eminent ability, in the way of law reform; and most assuredly he should always receive with the mo3t respectful and ready attention any suggestion or opinion emanating from his noble and learned Friend.
§ Bill read 1a.
§ House adjourned till To-morrow.