§ LORD BROUGHAM moved for a Return of the Revenue of the Court of Probate and Divorce, from Fees or otherwise. The noble and learned Lord said, that in his opinion the constitution of this Court was most unsatisfactory. In saying so he had not the slightest intention to cast any reflection on the distinguished Judge who presided over that Court with so much ability and integrity; but he thought the Court, considering its vast importance, ought to be constituted on a different scale, and with a more enlarged basis. In other Courts cases occasionally arose that were painful to the feelings of all the parties concerned, and decided personal questions of extreme importance; but in this Court, every case, so far as regarded divorce, had a painful interest and affected the personal condition of parties. Nothing could possibly exceed the importance of a jurisdic- 3 tion which gave the Judge power to decree the separation of married persons or the dissolution of the marriage tie; and, in addition, the disposal of important questions affecting property, and he had a positive objection to vesting in a single Judge the power of dissolving any marriage. In his opinion, the Divorce Court ought to consist of three Judges—a Chief Judge of Common Law, an Equity Judge, and a Judge of the Consistorial Court. A Court composed of these three Judges would form a competent tribunal to try all the important cases of separation, of dissolution of marriage, and of property that could come before them. There would be no increase of expenditure by an improvement of the Court, except in the most important branch—the Judges. To meet this additional expense there was a surplus of £12,000 or £13,000 a year arising from the fees of the Probate Court, now paid into the Consolidated Fund; but, even if there were no such surplus, financial considerations ought not to stand in the way of enlarging the basis of the Court, and making it fit to be entrusted with a jurisdiction of this important character.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he quite agreed with his noble and learned Friend that expense ought to be no obstacle whatever to obtaining the proper constitution of a Court of so important a character as the Court of Divorce. But he thought Parliament had acted wisely in proceeding cautiously in constituting the Court; and hitherto the business of the Court had been transacted satisfactorily. He would also remind his noble and learned friend that great objection was felt to multiplying Judges without urgent necessity.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREwas understood to refer to a case about to come before the Court in which the parties were natives of Ireland, but in which the marriage was solemnized in this country. He wished to know whether the jurisdiction of the Court extended to such a case.
THE LORD CHANCELLORreplied, that the question would depend altogether upon whether they were domiciled in Ireland or England. If they were domiciled in Ireland and Ireland alone, then the Court had no jurisdiction; but if in England it had.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Returns ordered to be laid before the House.