HC Deb 19 November 1830 vol 1 cc590-1
Mr. Ward

presented a petition from a Gentleman named Angustin Galleano, upon the important subject of the state of the Judicature there. The petitioner complained of a decision of the Court there, against which he had not been allowed to appeal.

Mr. Brougham

said, that he had been requested to support the prayer of the petition. The case of the petitioner was peculiar: An action had been brought against him for a sum of 250l.; he complained that injustice had been done him; but, in consequence of the amount, he was not allowed an appeal against the decision. He believed, that in this instance a trick had been resorted to for the purpose of preventing an appeal, because the amount of the money really in dispute was above double the sum for which the action was brought, and by the law of appeals, no appeal could be brought in a case where the demand was less than 500l.

Sir G. Murray

could say nothing of the facts alleged in this petition, as he had had no intimation of its being about to be presented.

Mr. Brougham

was aware of that circumstance, but vouched for the accuracy of the statement, and for the bad effect of the limitation upon the right of appeal.

The Solicitor General

said, that if the objection of the hon. and learned Gentleman was allowed to its full extent, there would be no limitation to the right of appeal. It would go even to destroy every subordinate Court which existed on the principle of limitation in the amount for which actions were to be brought.

Mr. Brougham

did not wish to destroy that principle, but to leave a discretion in the Court of Appeal, that the principle might Dot be converted into an abuse.

Mr. Hume

said, that this case was only one of the very numerous instances of the evils of allowing the colonies to be governed by orders in Council. Until a different principle prevailed, abuses would continue, and the colonies would be expensive to this country, without enjoying prosperity themselves.

Petition to be printed.