§ The order of the day for the house to take into further consideration the report on the Prize Regulation bill having been read, sir W. Scott moved, that the bill be re-committed.
§ Sir Charles Pole objected to the bill altogether, as being the very reverse, in fact, of that which it purported to be, namely, a bill for the encouragement of British seamen; it was rather a bill for the encouragement of Doctors' Commons, and for the discouragement of seamen, and which, he was convinced, instead of doing any 133 good, would be productive of considerable mischief. It was a bill to give certain judges salaries of 4000l. a year, and 1000l. a year upon their retirement from office, by way of pension. It was a bill to institute an expensive establishment, the expences of which were to be defrayed by the maimed and wounded seamen in Greenwich-Hospital. It took no notice of proctors in the prize courts, their conduct, or any limitation of their fees or costs; nor did it go to relieve the prize captors from the evils under which they laboured, through the delays occasioned by having their causes in the hands of a single proctor, so crowded with business, and so interested in delays as to cause the sailors infinite expence and vexation, and especially when, as was the custom, the proctor employed sold his business to another, and that person to a third. Sometimes the profits of the business were sold in anticipation, as was the case of Mr. Heseltine, who sold the anticipated profits of his business to his clerk for 5000l. The hon. admiral went into a statement to shew that the number of causes tried in the admiralty court, within the nine years ending in 1801, were no less than 4000, beside appeal cases; and that in one year there were 720, of which 560 were contested. The chief hardship, therefore, was, that the seamen who were suitors in that court, were confined to a single proctor, and he could see no reason why they might not, like every other class of suitors in other courts, chuse their own. Upon the whole, he was convinced that the seamen, whom it was professed to encourage, who should read the bill, would conceive it to be, what it really was, a mockery of their hopes. It would rather tend to promote, than prevent the desertion of seamen and petty officers. He was sorry to say from experience, that this brave class of men were neglected, but it was the truth. He respected the talents and character of the right hon. and learned gent. who brought it in, but he could not change his opinion of the measure. Another point he had to observe upon was, that the prize shares coming to his majesty's land forces, had not been accounted for in any document that he could find, either during the last or present war. The account surely ought to be forthcoming somewhere, and the money appropriated to an hospital, or other public institution, if there were no claimants. He concluded by voting against the recommitment of the bill.
134§ Mr. James Martin thanked the hon. admiral for having made the observations which he had then delivered, and believed that his sentiments were those of the public.
§ The Advocate-General (sir John Nicholl) vindicated the bill, which he said was, in most of its clauses, a transcript of the last Prize Cause bill, and the same in principle with every prize cause bill that had, been passed for the last century. The assertions of the hon. admiral, with respect to defraying of the expences of any institution, by charges on the worn-out seamen of Greenwich Hospital, were unfounded, otherwise than in the assertion of the hon. admiral; and with respect to restricting the claimant to the employment of the king's proctor, it could not be changed without violating the prerogative of his majesty, who has appointed that proctor. The gentleman now in that office, did not purchase his situation, but was regularly appointed after the death of his predecessor, and he believed no man ever acquitted the duties of his situation with more honour or fidelity. With respect to the delays which occurred to the captors in obtaining possession of prizes, the hon. admiral must know, that all right of prizes was in the crown, and that none could be given to the captors until judgment was finally pronounced in their favour. It was frequently a fortunate thing for the country, that decisions were not too rapidly made, as many questions of great delicacy, involving the rights of other nations, and their amicable intercourse with this, were implicated in those questions, and therefore they required the most cautious and deliberate proceedings. The hon. member enforced the propriety of the present arrangement, respecting the king's proctor, by a variety of illustrations. Foreign, ministers frequently interfered respecting captures, and government might feel it adviseable, on such representations, to take some steps which it would be very inconvenient to attain, if they were to be compelled to run about to a number of different proctors, chosen by the captors. Besides as to the alledged abuse, the king's proctor could not charge a farthing more than any other man in the profession. He was quite independent of the agents, and that was for the benefit of the captors. An alteration of the present system would be a change, but not an improvement. As for the five thousand pounds a year, was that all profit to the king's proctor? A great part of a proctor's 135 bill must be made up of money laid out, and perhaps only a fifth part of it was profit. The hon. and learned member then proceeded to condemn a hasty mode of censuring persons in public stations. The proctor's bill might be taxed by the register, and if that did not satisfy him, he could go to the judge of the court. The expences of the Causes arose out of the nature of the thing. Adjudication must be had. Evidence must be taken in a general way, by a long set of standing interrogatories at the out-ports, and translations of different foreign languages skilfully and precisely taken, and hence a great expence must necessarily be incurred. It was necessary for the justice and the honour of the country. With respect to limits, it must depend on circumstances, under the control indeed of the judge. There was no ground whatever for the various imputations and criminations that were attempted against the body of proctors. Who could limit the charges of suits in Westminster-Hall, or of business in parliament? The constitution and the administration of the court in Doctors'-Commons were excellent. Every possible proper means were taken for the ends of justice. The captor had a complete power to compel his agent; and as captors were sometimes indiscreet, a power was also given to Greenwich Hospital to call upon the agent. He did not know a more perfect system. This bill was very far preferable to that of last year, both for its particular legislative merits and for its economy.
§ Sir Charles Pole explained, that he meant no personal reflection on the present king's proctor, but objected to the office itself as centering in one person.
§ Sir J. B. Warren, in a very low tone of voice, made a few observations in favour of the bill.
§ Admiral Markham said, he did not rise to oppose the bill, as he thought it contained some very good clauses, but in other parts he felt persuaded that it would not answer the purpose intended. As for the state of our seamen, he was not one of those who thought that they were, or that they had been neglected. On the contrary, he believed that there was no class of people whose interests were always more sedulously attended to; and he thought that his hon. friend opposite (sir C. Pole) could not mean any thing contrary to the general meaning of this opinion; but only, that in this bill they were not considered quite so 136 much as they might. The board, or whatever it was called, at Greenwich Hospital, he thought objectionable. Greenwich Hospital was a great naval asylum, and it was highly necessary to preserve regularity within it. He could not, therefore, approve of setting up a sort of prize-office on such a plan, to which after a peace, the blessings of which we might be permitted to look to, four or five thousand seamen might resort in one day, and occasion a great deal of inconvenience. Every body must know in what numbers the sailors came to town after the conclusion of the last peace. Now, might not such number of persons going to the prize-office in the hospital, have a very bad effect on the wholesome regularity of that establishment? For this reason he disapproved of that situation for such a purpose. He likewise thought that the treasurer of the navy and governor of Greenwich hospital ought not to have the power of paying according to their own direction. He had no other motive nor object in what he now troubled the house, except the public good. Concerning the king's proctor, it was a delicate subject; but he was sure that some regulations on this head were much desired by the navy. He thought also that the agents were not sufficiently noticed. He considered the bill favourable; and if it was passed, he thought that, in a little time, circumstances would occur to render it prudent for those who had brought it in, to alter those parts which he now thought were objectionable. He must say, that on such a subject as this, he did not think it possible to pring in a perfect bill.
§ Sir W. Scott thanked the hon. admiral for the candid and liberal manner in which he had expressed himself when he stated his objections; but still he thought that both his objections, and those of the other hon. member, were rather reasons for going into a committee, than objections to the bill. He hoped to hear the hon. member (sir C. Pole) adopt the exposition of his sentiments respecting the treatment of sailors made by the hon. admiral, and retract the censure he had pronounced upon the legislature, and those who executed the laws, in such broad terms. He could not bring himself to think that the morals of Greenwich hospital would be endangered in the manner the honourable admiral seemed to fear, by the seamen going there to receive their pittance. He 137 declared his firm intention of resisting any change in the mode of the office of king's proctor, as being extremely dangerous. It was a matter only started about two years ago. He then proceeded to condemn the reflections made on the charges in the causes in Doctors' Commons, and could not think it a fair way of treating a court of justice, to get hold of some extravagant bill, without reference to the proper mode of corrections, and bring it into parliament, and make it the foundation of a complaint against the court of justice, which would have chastised the person who misconducted himself.—He must speak a little of himself. If such charges were well founded, there must be a disposition in the judge to resist the correction of abuses. Had he made a charge, such as the hon. member (sir C. Pole) had made against him, he should have gone out of the house with a consciousness of having done him an injustice.
§ Admiral Berkeley supported the bill, and thought it might be rendered more perfect in a committee. He praised very highly the talents and services of the hon. and learned baronet (sir W. Scott); but maintained that the abuses complained of two years ago by an hon. admiral actually did incontrovertibly exist, and they might exist again.
§ Sir C. Pole said, he was by no means disposed to adopt the interpretation which had been put on his words by an hon. admiral. His opinion was, that the interests of the seamen were not sufficiently attended to; and as that was his opinion, he trusted he might be permitted to express it freely as a member of parliament, without intending to say any thing personally offensive or unpleasant to any gentleman.
§ Dr. Laurence approved of the bill, and bore testimony to the very able manner in which his right hon. and learned friend (sir W. Scott) administered justice in the court of admiralty. He also defended the usual manner in which business was done in those courts, and instead of thinking that captors had any thing to complain of, he thought, on the contrary, that they had somewhat too great advantages over those who were to defend the property.—The question for the re-commitment of the was then put and carried.
§ Mr. Johnstone thought it necessary, before the speaker should leave the chair, to recommend an instruction to the committee to make some provision for the more 138 speedy determination of cases of appeal. He adverted to the number of unjust decisions of the vice-admiralty courts in the last war. 0f 318 decisions of this kind, 259 had been immediately reversed. He allowed all possible merit to the diligence of the right hon. gentleman opposite (sir, W. Scott) by means of which an accumulation of appeals, to 1000, beginning at the close of the American war, and constantly increasing during the last war, was gradually reduced, and now altogether removed. He represented the great inconvenience and expence attending this delay. He adverted to the improvement of the appeal tribunal by the association of the judges of the courts in Westminster-Hall, in the time of lord Hardwicke. He also adverted to the system recommended in these cases by Dr. Paul, lord Mansfield, sir Dudley Ryder, and sir George Leigh. He thought the administration of the admiralty court ought to be totally separated from that of the court of appeal. He moved that it be an instruction to the committee to make provision for the better regulation and dispatch of the trial of appeals in prize causes.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer allowed, it was important, that there should be all due dispatch in these cases; but he did not think any interposition of the legislature necessary with a view to that object. Indeed, the hon. gent. had himself acknowledged, that the difficulty that formerly stood in the way of the dispatch of these causes, had been removed by his right hon. friend (sir W. Scott). The constitution of the vice-admiralty courts abroad, was also materially amended from what it had been, at the time when, according to the statement of the hon. gent. fifteen out of sixteen of the decisions of these courts were reversed. It was a matter of great delicacy to interfere so materially with a judicature, which was to give satisfaction, not only to this country, but to all other nations. This delicacy was confirmed by a reference to the association of the judges of the courts in Westminster-Hall in the decision of appeals, which though undoubtedly, as the hon. gentleman stated, an improvement, was regarded with much jealousy by foreign powers, as an innovation that might lead to some abridgment of their rights. There was no necessity for separating the admiralty judicature from that of appeals. His right hon. friend, from delicacy, never attended on appeals 139 from his own decisions. For himself he did not think this delicacy necessary, and in the highest tribunal in the empire, it was known that the highest judicial officer, often with much advantage to justice, spoke on judgments given by himself.
§ The Judge Advocate accounted for the multitude of appeals in the last war, by the circumstance of the Americans being then for the first time in the situation of a neutral power, and their carrying on the whole colonial trade of France.—The proposition was negatived, and the house went into the committee, in which
§ Mr. Rose recommended the propriety of having an office where seamen, or their representatives, might know their share of all prizes, and the names of the agents. He thought this office should be under the government of Greenwich-Hospital. This proposition gave rise to much conversation, but the suggestion was generally approved of.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer was perfectly sure a generally known office for prizes was highly necessary, and he thought it would be more properly situated in London than in Greenwich. Still, however, he could not agree that a new board of commissioners, with salaries, should be appointed, when the addition of a few clerks to an establishment already in existence in the navy office, would be likely to attain the end in view. The clause stood over till the report. The bill was then gone through.—Adjourned to Thursday.