§ LORD LYNDHURSTbegged to take this opportunity of asking his noble and learned Friend upon the woolsack for some explanation as to the delay which had occurred in regard to certain measures for the amendment of the law which he had introduced or promised to introduce. Last Session his noble and learned Friend had introduced a Bill for altering the law of divorce, and also for the purpose of transferring the jurisdiction from the Ecclesiastical Courts to the Court of Chancery. After that Bill had proceeded a certain length, part of the Bill was withdrawn by the voluntary act of his noble and learned Friend, and the other part, in consequence of some opposition to the Bill on the part of a right rev. Prelate. He stated as his 1190 reason that the Testamentary Bill had been thrown out in the other House; and his noble and learned Friend, in answer to the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench, said that the Government would use their utmost endeavour to pass a Bill on that subject. It was a singular circumstance that that Bill went down last year from that House on the 7th of April, but not a single attempt was made by the law officers of the Crown to proceed with it. His noble and learned Friend also stated that the Government would be prepared to introduce in the present Session a large measure of reform, embracing the whole of the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts. He did not find that either in that or the other House of Parliament any attempt had been made to redeem that pledge. His noble and learned Friend had not even introduced a Bill of divorce, or any Bill relating to matrimonial cases. The Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill had gone down at an early period of the previous Session to the House of Commons. It was, therefore, perfected; but, not with standing this circumstance, and that Parliament met in December, the law officers of the Crown did not think proper to bring it forward until the end of May, and this Bill had consequently again fallen through and been withdrawn. These circumstances required some explanation. His noble and learned Friend might mention the war as the cause of the abandonment of this Bill, but he did not see that either his noble and learned Friend or the law officers of the Crown in the other House of Parliament had troubled themselves much about the complications of the Eastern question. From circumstances that had come to his knowledge, he believed that this mode of proceeding might be explained by some want of understanding or co-operation between the Lord Chancellor and the law officers of the Crown. This opinion was supported by the fact that his noble and learned Friend had introduced a Bill for the registry of deeds, and for the purpose of shortening conveyances and simplifying titles. That Bill was fully considered and discussed in their Lordships' House, was referred to a Select Committee, and went down to the other House of Parliament with the approbation and sanction of his noble and learned Friend and of that House. But what happened in the other House? The Bill was immediately opposed by the law officers of the Crown. The Solicitor General said that what was wanted was a Bill, not for 1191 the registry of deeds, but of titles. The consequence was, that the Bill was referred to a Select Committee, and nothing more had been heard of it from that time to this. But that was not the only fact that showed the want of cordial co-operation between the Lord Chancellor and the law officers of the Crown in the other House. His noble and learned Friend had issued a Commission for the consolidation of the Statute law. His noble and learned Friend was the President of that Commission, he sanctioned all its proceedings, and the law officers of the Crown also attended its meetings. The Report of that Commission was laid on the table. On looking at that Report he found it signed by all the Commissioners except the law officers of the Crown. He therefore took it for granted that they differed from the Lord Chancellor upon that Report. He relied upon this for substantiating what he stated—that there was a want of co-operation and good understanding with respect to law reform between the Lord Chancellor and the law officers of the Crown. This had led to the greatest possible inconvenience, and it showed that without a good understanding between the legal authorities of the Government it was in vain to expect an amendment of the law. The result was that up to the present time, when they were going to adjourn for the holidays, not one single Government Bill for reforming the laws of England had been passed. This was a most unsatisfactory state of things and required explanation; and he had made these observations to enable his noble and learned Friend to make such explanations as he might think proper to offer to their Lordships.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the first complaint of his noble and learned Friend referred to the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill, and he truly stated that last Session he (the Lord Chancellor) had introduced that Bill. It was much considered by a Select Committee, and the Bill went down to the Commons, where certainly it did not receive approbation, and did not become law. The course that he thought it best to take in the present Session was, that the Bill should originate in the House of Commons, and, a great many objections in detail having been made to the Bill of last year, he consulted with the Solicitor General, who was to take charge of it, and adopted some Amendments likely to smooth the passage of the Bill in the other House of Parliament. He was not pre- 1192 pared to state the day on which that Bill was introduced, but he was certain his noble and learned Friend was mistaken in supposing that it was not brought in until the latter part of May. He believed it was brought in in March, but to this he could not pledge himself—at all events, it was prepared quite early in the Session, and it was introduced as soon as the state of public business made it possible to proceed with it; and although he should not fall back upon the war as a justification for doing nothing, he thought that the state of business arising out of the discussions about the war, which had taken up four-fifths of the Session, would explain why so dull a subject had been so little able to obtain a hearing. His noble and learned Friend ought to be the last person to express great surprise, and to make it matter of reproach that this Bill had not received the sanction of the Legislature, because the same thing had happened to him also when his noble and learned Friend himself adorned the woolsack. In 1843 a similar measure was introduced into the House of Commons and failed. In 1844 it was introduced into this House; again it failed; and the succeeding Chancellor again introduced it in the following Session. He hoped that the same course would be again adopted, and that the measure would be introduced next Session, and then the matter would be placed in the same position that it occupied during the Chancellorship of his noble and learned Friend. It was said that he had promised a comprehensive reform of the Ecclesiastical Courts. Now, the fact was this: He had been taunted with doing only half his duty in introducing a measure for the reform of the testamentary jurisdiction; he had been told that he ought to deal with the whole subject—namely, testamentary jurisdiction, matrimonial jurisdiction, and Church discipline jurisdiction; and he accordingly undertook to consider measures which would embrace all these matters. The Matrimonial Bill had been prepared, but the subject was so connected with the Testamentary Bill that it was impossible for him to introduce it until the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill had proceeded so far as to render it certain how the court would be constituted which might possibly have to decide upon both matrimonial and testamentary clauses. A Bill had been framed with great care upon the subject of Church discipline, and had been submitted 1193 to the right rev. Bishops; but there were great differences of opinion with respect to it, and the subject was attended with so many difficulties, that he had not been able to mature a measure which he could hope would secure the approbation of the right rev. Prelates, or, if they disapproved of it, of their Lordships, and the measure had not, therefore, been presented to the House. He had been assured by the Solicitor General that the Testamentary Bill was received in the other House with every prospect of success; but its attention had been so absorbed by subjects of overwhelming interest that it was found impracticable to pass it. With regard to the suggestion that there was not a cordial co-operation between the law officers of the Crown and himself, and the example adduced by his noble and learned Friend of the Registration Bill, which the Solicitor General did not support in the other House, he must say that his noble and learned Friend was labouring under a mistake. The Solicitor General thought the Bill did not go far enough, and it was referred to a Select Committee, of which Mr. Walpole and other Gentlemen besides the law officers were Members, which recommended the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the whole subject. He felt bound to issue such a Commission, and the Solicitor General had assured him that the labours of the Commission were so far advanced that in the course of the ensuing recess they would not only produce a Report recommending a better system of registration, but would also frame a measure which might be introduced next Session. His noble and learned Friend further complained of the slugglishness of the Government in not having introduced any measures of law reform during the present Session, He denied that accusation. A Chancellor or a Minister was not doing good by simply introducing measure after measure, which he called measures of reform; but if he found that anything was going wrong it was his duty to provide a remedy. The statement that no measure of reform had become law during this Session was certainly near the truth. [Lord LYNDHURST: It is the exact truth.] But early in the Session he had introduced a measure giving extended summary jurisdiction in cases of petty offences. That Bill had passed this House, and had been referred to a Select Committee of the House of Commons; and his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary had as- 1194 sured him, on Saturday last, that he had not the least doubt of its becoming law. It must, however, be remembered that at the present moment, in consequence of the provisions of one of their Lordships' Standing Orders, the House of Commons were more anxious to forward the Bills which originated with themselves than to proceed with those which had been sent down from this House. Another measure which would be of essential benefit to the mass of the community, although it might not excite a great deal of popular approbation, had been sent down to the other House. It was the Bill for getting rid of the necessity for private Acts of Parliament in dealing with settled estates; and the Solicitor General, who had taken charge of it, had assured him that he did not doubt that it would eventually be passed. It had been referred to a Select Committee, because there was a notion in the other House that it would have the effect of permitting the enclosure of Hampstead Heath. It had not the slightest reference to that subject; but the insertion of a clause had boon proposed, which would set at rest all doubts of that kind; and the Solicitor General had informed him that he did not doubt that the measure would become law during the Session. They had been told that the Charity Commission had done nothing since its appointment. He protested against the truth of that assertion, for the Commissioners had done a great deal of good in an unobtrusive manner, and he was satisfied that they would do more good if their powers were further extended. He had, consequently, introduced a measure extending their powers. It had been sent down to the other House, and he should be much disappointed if it did not become law this Session. He had also introduced a Bill for reforming the University of Cambridge. He therefore felt not guilty of the charge made by his noble and learned Friend, having introduced many important measures which promised to become law before the end of the Session; and he thought his noble and learned Friend would have done better to wait until the Session drew nearer to a close before making his complaint; but he supposed his noble and learned Friend was about to quit London, and that it was more convenient for him to make his complaint now than to wait for the three or four weeks which remained to the end of the Session. He much regretted that the Attorney and Solicitor Generals had not 1195 thought fit to sign the Report of the Statute Law Commission; but he had no authority to call upon them to sign it if they did not think proper to do so. He should be glad to be the means of introducing next Session measures which had failed in the present; but he thought that his noble and learned Friend's attributing blame to him because the House of Commons did not pass the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill was really attributing blame to him to which he was not obnoxious. In the course of the present Session he had received two Reports which he had anxiously considered. One of these Reports had reference to the County Courts, and would necessarily give rise to legislation; and, indeed, a Bill had been partly prepared, but he could not with any propriety have introduced it during the present Session, for it was impossible that it could have passed into law. The other Report was as to the state of the Encumbered Estates Court, Ireland. He was in hopes that he might have introduced a Bill on this subject this Session; but the changes recommended by the Report were so important, and, on the whole, so useful, that they would require considerable consideration. He might have obtained some credit for introducing this Bill, but he felt that it would have been obtaining credit under false pretences, for the Bill could not have passed this Session. He had also, at the suggestion of his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham), introduced a Bill, which had passed their Lordships' House, for additional sessions and assizes; the Bill, however, was objected to by the other House, and required more consideration than could be given to it this Session. He had, however, been in communication with the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and was assured by him that, should this Bill not pass into law this Session, the Royal prerogative would be brought to bear on the subject, and that the inconvenience which it was intended to remove should be provided for by the exercise of the Royal prerogative in the issue of several additional Commissions.
§ LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that his noble and learned Friend had replied to, him by a tu quoque; but this did not apply to his case, for when he held the office now held by his noble and learned Friend he did his utmost to pass the Testamentary Jurisdiction Bill. His complaint was not that they had failed in passing Bills, but that they had let the last two Sessions 1196 pass without making any attempt to pass any Bills. His statement was, that not a single Bill for the improvement of the law which had been proposed by Her Majesty's Government had received the Royal assent. His noble and learned Friend had met this statement, not by contradicting it, for that was impossible, but by stating that a considerable number of Bills had passed their Lordships, and had been sent to the other House; and, though they had not passed a single Bill during the six months, yet his noble and learned Friend flattered himself that during the four or five remaining weeks of the Session they would pass these Bills. His noble and learned Friend was much more sanguine on this point than he was; for he took what had been done as a good picture of what was likely to take place, and had no hope that the Bills would be passed this Session.
LORD BROUGHAMtrusted that his noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst) would, early next Session, apply himself to one of the subjects to which he had directed his observations—namely, to that of the Ecclesiastical Courts' jurisdiction, particularly with regard to the matter of divorce; for the state of the law with regard to this subject was in a most shameful and disgraceful state. His noble and learned Friend, among the many great and invaluable services which he had rendered to his country, could not render it a greater service than by taking up, with all the weight which was justly due to his authority in that House, the country, and the profession, the subject which had been referred to.
§ LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that he could not understand why there should be a difference between the law of divorce in the northern and southern parts of the island. He believed that in Scotland the law of divorce worked exceedingly well, and he saw no reason why it should not be extended to England.
LORD BROUGHAMwas convinced that if his noble and learned Friend would peruse the evidence and the Report of the Committee over which he (Lord Brougham) presided a few years ago, he would find abundant reasons for holding more firmly the opinion which, he had now expressed.