Mr. J. F. Campbellsaid, he rose, pursuant to notice, to call the attention of the House to the present mode of administering justice in Wales. The hon. member then proceeded to point out the abuses which existed in the present system of administering justice in that country, and pointed out the inexpediency of having a separate jurisdiction, where the whole kingdom was governed by the same laws. He concluded by moving the following resolutions: "1. That to keep up a distinction 667 of judicature between people inhabiting different parts of the realm, conduces of itself to no positive advantage; that the original motives which made the ancient separation of Wales from England, prudent, and even necessary, no longer exist in these days, and that no new political event has occurred to render the continuance of it beneficial. 2. That it is highly expedient that the administration of justice, and the judicial establishments of Wales, should, as nearly as possible, be assimilated to those of England. That it is highly expedient that farther provision should be made, in order to secure the independence of the Welch judge? 4. That it is highly expedient that the Welch judges should not have seats in this House.
Lord Castlereaghsaid, that the committee who had sat on the subject had gone deeply into the question, and he could not but regret that they had not brought in some specific resolution. He objected to the present motion as of too sweeping a nature; and, besides the difficulty attending the introduction of the English system of laws into any country, the twelve judges of England were excluded from the House merely because they constituted part of the other House. Such was, however, not the case with the Welsh judges, and he therefore saw no reason to exclude them from the House. He should move the previous question.
Mr. Wynnentered into a detail of the circumstances which took place on the committee, and supported the motion.
§ Mr. F. Lewiscontended that the Welsh judges had often been appointed more for parliamentary purposes than for the administration of justice. He supported the motion, as he conceived the system required much amelioration.
Mr. Bathurstopposed the motion, as he saw no necessity for such a change; besides, there was no application made for it from Wales.
§ Mr. Barhamcontended, that the system ought to be revised and amended. He knew a case where a judge was consulted in his private character a few days before judgment, and on his giving judgment a few days after, a Welsh attorney held up a paper, saying, "My lord, here is your opinion given to me on such a day, and it is quite contrary to the one now delivered." He was reprimanded, but still persevered, declaring it was a very odd thing the judge should take his money 668 one day for an opinion, and the king's money for a different opinion the next day.
Colonel Woodsaid, the report of the committee was deserving of the highest consideration, it having been composed of most respectable and enlightened individuals. He thought the House should be extremely cautious in interfering with the administration of justice, and vindicated the character of the professional men in the county he represented. On the whole, he believed the judicature was an essential blessing to the principality, and should be sorry to see it removed.
§ Mr. Scarlettconcurred in the object of the resolutions, but recommended his hon. friend to withdraw them, and bring them forward in another shape. A specific measure, founded on the same principles, would, he thought, deserve the approbation of the House.