Lords Sitting of 28 March 1833

MINUTES
Papers ordered. On the Motion of Lord ELLENBOROUGH, Copies of Correspondence between the President of the Board of Control, and the Court of Directors of the East India Company, with respect to the Measures to be adopted on the Expiration of the present Charter of the East India Company.
Bill. Read a third time:—Sugar Duties.
Petitions presented. By the Bishops of HEREFORD, CHESTER LICHFIELD, and COVENTRY; by Lord AUCKLAND, and the Earl of RODEN, from a Number of Places,—for a Better Observance of the Sabbath.—By Lord CLONCURRY, from three Places in Ireland; and by Lord POLTIMORE, from Wellow,—against Tithes and Church Cess. By the Earl of WICKLOW, from Elphin; and by the Earl of RODEN, from Maghera, Kilmegan and Kilmainham,—against the proposed Measure of Church Reform (Ireland).

ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.
Lord Suffieldhad to present Petitions from three different places upon this subject. He

1185
had, indeed, many more; but he presented these at the present moment just to clear the way for others, which he believed would soon be sent up to their Lordships. There were certain rumours abroad as to the intentions of the Ministers with regard to negro slavery. If there was any foundation for those rumours, he was sure that they would produce in the public mind the same consternation that I they had given rise to in his. As, however, they were but rumours, they did not lessen his confidence in his Majesty's Ministers at this moment, but he trusted they would prove untrue. This measure could not much longer he delayed; for, if it were, it would be demanded as forcibly and irresistibly as the measure of Reform had been. He knew that the principles of his. Majesty's Ministers were sound and right; but he could not be blamed for entertaining some fears when he knew that they were met on almost every side with an array of prejudice and of false notions of self-interest that it would be hard for them to overcome. Whatever measure they might propose would be strenuously resisted, and he wished to get for them that support which would alone enable them to carry any measure upon this subject by the strength of popular opinion. That support they would not have if the rumours he had alluded to were true. He would tell them most distinctly, that nothing short of the immediate and total abolition of negro slavery would satisfy the people of this country. He wished here to say what meaning he attached to the words "immediate abolition." He did not understand by them the sailing of the first ship that could carry out their determination, but the earliest possible and practicable substitution of legal restraint for the absolute and irresponsible power of the master. He should move to bring up the petition, which was from the inhabitants of Edinburgh, who, to the number of 21,291, had attached their names to it.
Lord ELLENBOROUGHwas not aware of the rumours to which the noble Baron alluded; and it would have been more convenient to their Lordships if the noble Baron had stated the nature of them. Without entertaining any particular confidence in his Majesty's Ministers, he must say, that he should be unwilling to relieve them from any responsibility upon the subject of colonial slavery, to put it upon the noble Lord opposite. He had hoped that, before
1186
now, that House might have been called on to enter into some discussions upon the question. The state in which it stood was that in which it was most productive, he would not say of inconvenience merely, but of danger. The question might be said to be at this moment suspended over them. If the Ministers really had prepared any plan, it was desirable that they should produce it, and subject it to the investigation of Parliament. The delay in doing so would only tend to create difficulties, which might frustrate the carrying into effect the intentions of Parliament, as declared in 1823, and might defeat the reasonable wishes of the people. The uncertainty in which the matter stood now, both here and in the West Indies, must create in the minds both of the planters and the slaves, feelings that would render it difficult, if not almost impossible, for Parliament to adopt afterwards any measure beneficial to the great interests of the country, and capable of being carried into effect with safety to the colonies. He deprecated delay as much as he wished to avoid precipitancy, and he hoped that his Majesty's Ministers would appear, when their plan was produced, to have taken a more sober and rational view of the subject than seemed to have been taken by the noble Lord opposite.
Lord Suffieldsaid, that the rumours to which he alluded he had seen embodied in a paragraph in a daily journal. If those rumours were correct, the plan for emancipation would not, he was sure, satisfy the people. He feared, that whatever plan the Ministers might propose, would be opposed as far as possible by the West-India proprietors. His Lordship then presented a petition from Sheffield, signed by 11,000.
Viscount Goderichsaid, that after what had passed, their Lordships would perhaps excuse him if he said a few words upon this subject. With respect to the rumours of the intentions of Government as to the subject of colonial slavery, it was, of course, quite impossible that he should he answer able for them. Even the noble Lord himself did not seem to place much reliance upon them, by the manner in which he had stated them. The noble Lord did at first not state what they were, and afterwards he referred to some extract from a newspaper. Every one must agree with him, that it was not necessary for the Government to undertake to explain rumours founded on such loose authority. The noble Lord had

1187
said, with respect to the delay of which he complained, that it arose from that particular body of persons who were interested in the consideration of this great question. He was not conscious that there had been anything which could fairly and strictly be called delay. In a matter of this kind, it was the duty of the Government to give their utmost consideration to views and circumstances which necessarily belonged to so intricate a matter; and he thought, therefore, that no charge of delay could be substantiated against the Government; and it was, consequently, not his business to state any communication which had taken place, or any result which might follow. He was perfectly aware of the importance of the subject. It would be strange if he were not. He was equally aware, that the sense of Parliament should be taken on this subject at the earliest period; but he nevertheless must take the liberty of saying, that if the wish for bringing forward this subject at an earlier period of this Session had been complied with, it would have been anything but advantageous or safe, or satisfactory, with a view to the final and just settlement of the question.
Earl Fitzwilliamwished to make a few remarks with regard to the delay which had been made the subject of observation. When his noble friend said, that the question must be early settled, he did not mean that the people wished it to be precipitated, and for himself he should at once say, that he thought the question ought not to be brought forward till the undivided attention of both branches of the Legislature could be given to it. He was the person who had most recently taken his scat in their Lordships' House, and he more recently than any of them had been in contact with large bodies of the people; and he could tell their Lordships, most of whom from their habits were less in the habit of meeting them than he was, that they were not well aware of the strong feeling that existed among the people on the subject. There was a time when this question was confined to the large towns, and when secluded districts, and the distant agricultural quarters of the country knew nothing of it; but at this moment these places were as anxious on the subject as any others. If their Lordships did not decide this question satisfactorily to the people, they would not be, what they were to a certain extent
1188
although not elected, the representatives of the people.
The Duke of Buckinghamregretted, that the measure which the Ministers had determined on, had not been introduced earlier. It was the duty of his Majesty's Ministers to have brought it forward at as early a period as possible. That the question was not brought forward earlier was not the fault of the West-India proprietors, who were most anxious to have it considered, and who complained that it had been so long delayed. If the Ministers consulted any one connected with the West Indies, they did so partially, and it was of that partiality and of the delay, that the West-India proprietors justly complained.
Earl Greysaid, that whatever anxiety the Ministers might feel to bring forward this question, they were perfectly convinced that it required great deliberation and a most accurate examination of all the circumstances connected with it; and still more, that to render the measure at once effectual and beneficial, they must have the active co-operation of those whose interests were connected with the measure before they introduced it. However easy and popular might be these attacks on the Ministry for the delay of which they were accused, he would rather hear them than subject himself to the charge of precipitancy in introducing a measure which, unless brought forward with the greatest possible care, could be neither safe nor satisfactory. He did not think it could be imputed to the Ministers as matter of blame, that they should wish to get the co-operation of those most interested in a work which all must acknowledge to be most difficult and dangerous. Their endeavours had been to assure themselves of that co-operation. The noble Duke had complained that their communications to the West-India body had been partial. Surely he would not have had the Ministers go to general assemblies of the West-India proprietors at Exeter Hall, or other places, and there make and receive communications on this delicate subject. Their only way, then, was to consult privately those who were interested in it, so that they might obtain their co-operation if they were favourable, and if not, that they might procure information. As to the plan, he could not at that time state what it was. He could only say, generally, that the attention of

1189
the Government had been directed constantly and carefully to this great object, and that they would bring it forward as soon as they could, with a probability of its satisfactory result. He did not understand what the rumours alluded to were. The Ministers were not, however, responsible for these reports, nor should he pretend to explain them. If there was nothing more in the matter than to say that there should be an immediate abolition of slavery, the work would be short and easy, but complicated as the question was, many interests being concerned, and the difficulties increasing the more it was looked at, the task was something very different from merely saying, the slave should be free. He was glad to learn from his noble friend, that among the friends of abolition "immediate" did not mean "instant." He was as anxious for emancipation as any other noble Lord, and he would take the terms of his noble friend, that as soon as it could be safely accomplished, it ought to be. But in effecting it, especial attention should be shown to the interests of those unfortunate creatures for whom they would have to legislate.
The Duke of Buckinghamthought it right to state, that great misapprehension existed in the public as to the opinions and wishes of the West-India body, the majority of the members of which were as anxious for emancipation as any other persons could be.
The Duke of Richmondmerely rose to deny the statement, that disputes had taken place between Ministers as to the abolition. There had been no disputes whatever in the Cabinet upon the subject.
Lord Suffieldwas rather surprised at the statement of the noble Duke on the opposition benches (the Duke of Buckingham); for he considered that the whole conduct of the West-India body in question had been characterised by contumacious opposition to his Majesty's Government. Throughout they had desired delay, and endeavoured to procrastinate a settlement. When he asked for immediate emancipation, he meant that measures should be immediately taken to effect that desirable object. His Lordship then presented a petition in favour of "immediate emancipation, with safety to all parties," from Glasgow, signed by upwards of 31,000 persons.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, no persons were
1190
more interested than the slaves themselves in the avoidance of intemperate and irrational legislation.

LOCAL JUDICATURES—LAW RE-FORM.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that with their Lordships' leave, he should present to them a Bill of very great importance, and on which much consideration had been bestowed. The Bill was for establishing, throughout the kingdom, Courts of Local Jurisdiction. It was well known that he had, some time since, introduced this measure, and its principle and many of its provisions were then very fully discussed. Indeed, the principle had been so fully discussed, that he should not trouble their Lordships now with one word in favour of the measure, reserving himself, on that point, until he proposed the second reading of the Bill, to which he meant now to ask their Lordships to give a first reading. He admitted, that the Bill was one of very great importance, and, therefore, he felt it his duty not to introduce it, without endeavouring to give their Lordships a brief outline of its object and main provisions. It was a Bill to establish, experimentally in the first instance, in certain counties and districts, with a view to extend the principle ultimately—and, he trusted, within a very short period, universally—throughout this kingdom, Courts of Local Jurisdiction. It was proposed that there should be a Sergeant-at-Law, or a barrister of ten years' standing, to preside over those Courts, for it was most important that the Judge should be a person of such weight and professional character that the suitors of the Courts should feel a well-grounded confidence that justice was administered by a person of learning and experience. The next question which suggested itself was, as to the kind and extent of jurisdiction which the Courts established under this Bill should exercise. First, as to the amount of the debt in actions of debt, or actions of that description, and of damages in what the lawyers called actions of tort. In the Bill which he had formerly introduced on this subject he had proposed that the Courts of Local Jurisdiction should take cognizance of all actions of debt, when the sum sought to be recovered did not exceed 100 l. Since he had introduced his former measure he had had a great deal of communication with those learned persons who composed the law commission; and from various

1191
considerations, into which he should not now enter, he had come to the resolution of proposing, at least in the first instance, that the Courts of Local Jurisdiction should only take cognizance of debts to the amount of 20 l. and under, instead of 100 l. as he had formerly proposed. Doubtless this was a great restriction of the powers which he had originally intended to give to the Courts of Local Jurisdiction; but, as he had before intimated, there were a variety of reasons which had induced him to accede to so important a deviation from the plan originally proposed. What was now intended was, to give the Local Courts a jurisdiction in all actions of debt, or actions of that nature, to the amount of 20 l. In other words, 20 l. was the greatest amount which a plaintiff could recover in those Courts in an action of debt. In actions of damages, which included actions for assault, trespass, false imprisonment, seduction, slander, maliciously suing out a commission of bankrupt and all wrongs of that description, it was proposed that the Local Courts should have a jurisdiction in all cases in which the damages laid in the declaration did not exceed 50 l. It was well known, however, that Juries were in the habit, in actions of tort, of not giving the amount of damages laid—in fact, they usually gave very much less—and it would not be possible, perhaps, at once to induce Juries to depart from that practice. It was, therefore, intended to allow the Courts of Local Jurisdiction to take cognizance of all actions of tort, in which the damages were not laid at a sum exceeding 50 l; but as the Bill also contained a provision that no costs should be obtained by any plaintiff who brought his action in any of the superior courts, and recovered less damages than 20 l. the damages really sought to be recovered in the Local Courts would generally amount only to 20 l.: thus limiting the jurisdiction of those Courts in actions of tort, as well as actions of debt, to the sum of 20 l. The trial of all questions connected with real property, all actions involving questions as to title, or as to the right to tithes or tolls, would be excepted from the jurisdiction of the Local Courts, and properly confined, as they now were, to the superior Courts. He held in his hand a few returns which he should read, to show that such actions as those which it was intended to place under the jurisdiction of the Local Courts formed no small
1192
proportion of the whole number of actions brought in this kingdom. It appeared from those returns that, in the year 1826, the number of actions of debt brought in the three superior Courts of Common Law at Westminster amounted to 93,000. Of that number 30,000 were for debts under 20 l., and 48,000 for debts under 50 l. whilst only the remaining 15,000, or about one-sixth of the whole, were brought for debts above 50 l. In the year 1822 he found that 890 cases were tried in London and Middlesex, cases which originated in the superior Courts, and were brought to trial in London and Middlesex. In 313, or above one third of those 890 cases, he found that the damages recovered were under 20 l.; and this return included actions for debt, as well as actions for damages. Generally speaking, one-third of the actions in the superior Courts were brought for sums not exceeding 20 l. He had returns showing the number of cases tried on the Oxford Circuit, in the years 1829 and 1830, which confirmed, or more than confirmed, the accuracy of this calculation. Out of 340 cases tried on that Circuit in those years, 160, or nearly one-half, were for sums under 20 l. So much for the jurisdiction of the Local Courts in compulsory cases—in cases in which the plaintiff must bring the defendant into the Local Courts and into no other Courts. But there was a provision in the Bill which extended the jurisdiction of the Local Courts upon the consent of the parties to an action. It was proposed, in fact, to give the Local Courts a jurisdiction in all descriptions of actions, and to any amount, provided the parties to the action consented. There was another very important provision in this Bill, by which the plaintiff or defendant in all actions of debt was at liberty to examine his antagonist upon oath before the trial of the cause. There was also a provision made to give the Judge of the Local Court the power of acting as an arbitrator. It too frequently happened at present, that after a cause was brought down to be tried before a Judge, and great expense was gone to in procuring the attendance of witnesses, it was found that the question was more fitted to the decision of an arbitrator than of a Jury; and it was referred after all the expenses had been incurred. Much of the expense and delay consequent on such a proceeding would be spared by a reference to the local Judge. There was

1193
another provision in the Bill which he considered one of great importance—he meant the establishment of a Court of Reconcilement. The principle on which those Courts were established in other countries, and the success which had attended their institution, was matter of notoriety. He believed that in France the institution of Courts of Reconcilement had been attended with less success than in other countries. In Belgium and Holland he understood those Courts had been established with considerable success; and in some countries the success of these Courts was signally satisfactory and beneficial to the inhabitants. He alluded particularly to Denmark and Norway. After the Courts of Reconcilement were established in those countries, the number of suits fell off to one-third; that was to say, the total amount of actions was diminished by two-thirds. In a period of nine years 724,000 actions had been commenced, and of that number 448,000, or more than one-half, had been successfully and satisfactorily settled by the interposition of a Court of Reconcilement. In the year 1822 (he spoke now only of Denmark) the number of actions commenced was 31,000, of which the Courts of Reconcilement settled two-thirds, or 21,000; and of the remaining 10,000 very many never found their way into court. So much for the system under which the parties came before a temperate and disinterested Judge, who decided fairly between them. The next matter to be referred to the courts of local Jurisdiction was that class of cases in which the Court of Chancery now exercised a peculiar jurisdiction. He might here state, that he had kept out of the Bill all cases relating to legacies so that tinder this Bill the Courts of Local Jurisdiction would have no cognizance of that class of cases. This exception was made not because he was of opinion that no change was desirable in cases of that description, but that he conceived that the alteration would be better introduced by another Bill. The Bill gave the Judges of the Local Courts the power to act in all cases within their own districts as Masters in Chancery resident in the country. In all those cases in Chancery in which it was necessary to refer to the Master, and it was thought better to have vivâ voce evidence, the examination would proceed in the country, and by that means save great expense, as well as
1194
delay, to the suitors of the Court of Chancery. Another jurisdiction which the Bill proposed to bestow was that of bankruptcy. The late Bankruptcy Court Act, which had been completely successful, led to the extension of jurisdiction, which was now proposed, and which had not been inserted in the former Bill introduced by him. The establishment of the new Bankruptcy Court had given the most unqualified satisfaction to all persons interested—indeed he might say to the whole commercial world. He believed that there was no one so singular as to deny that the establishment of that Court was a most desirable and beneficial improvement in the administration of an important branch of the law; and it was now proposed, under this Bill, to make the local Judges commissioners, so that one of those Judges would stand precisely in the same situation within his own district, in all cases of bankruptcy, as if the Judges of the new Bankruptcy Court had sent down a commission to him in a particular case. The last of the provisions of this Bill to which he was about to call their Lordships' attention, was one of very great importance, not only intrinsically, but because of what it might and would tend to. He proposed to give local Judges the power of staying execution in all cases, unless where the defendant refused to answer the questions put to him relating to his property, or refused to give up that property for the benefit of his creditors. This provision, he trusted and believed, would lay the sure foundation for one of the greatest and most beneficial alterations ever made in the law of debtor and creditor; he meant the abolition of imprisonment for debt. A measure on this subject was proposed and would be shortly introduced by an hon. and learned friend of his in the other House. The great difficulty in bringing such a measure into practical operation consisted in the want of what he might call a proper machinery for securing the debtor's property for the benefit of his creditors. The machinery provided by this Bill would be equally applicable in principle to all cases of debtor and creditor. In his (the Lord Chancellor's) opinion no person ought to be imprisoned for debt unless he refused to answer the questions put to him, or to surrender his property—or, in short, unless he refused to do something which he ought to do for the satisfaction of his

1195
creditors, or that he had contracted a debt fraudulently or extravagantly, by living beyond his means. In the first of those cases, a debtor was contumacious when he refused to do that which the law directed him to do—in the last he was criminal. But in no other way, or in no other cases, but those of contumacy, or criminality, ought any man to be imprisoned for debt. Such was the principle of the measure which he thought he might state would be brought forward speedily after the recess in the other House of Parliament, by a learned friend of his—a principle which in his opinion, was consistent with reason, justice and, humanity. He could also say, that it was based on the recommendations contained in the report of the common law commissioners, and that in drawing it up every regard had been paid to imparting to creditors every security which it was possible to extend to them. In fact, its provisions would be of greater benefit to creditors than of advantage to debtors, and he had no doubt that when the measure came to be fully discussed by the Legislature, it would surely be adopted. It would be impossible, he thought, to achieve the objects to which he had stated the Bill had reference, except by the establishment of Local Courts; But that being done, then every facility for the accomplishment of those objects would be afforded. Having given an outline of the Bill for establishing Courts of Local Jurisdiction, he would also state, that another measure for regulating the appellate jurisdiction of the Privy Council would be introduced into Parliament. The transfer of the jurisdiction formerly exercised by the High Court of Delegates rendered this measure necessary; and he hoped it might lead, at no very distant period, to a matter which he considered of still more importance—some regulation of the appellate jurisdiction of their Lordships' House, which would remedy the evils, and meet the objections now made to the mode in which that jurisdiction was exercised. There was another Bill which he had prepared, and which he should ask their Lordships to give a first reading to some evening before the recess, the object of which was, a reform in the practice and constitution of the offices connected with the Court of Chancery. The contemplated regulations would extend to the Six Clerks-office to the Registrar's-office, and, in a great degree
1196
to the Masters'-office. A number of useless and cumbrous places would be got rid of; and the new arrangements, he had reason to think, would greatly diminish the delays so much complained of in proceedings in equity, and at the same time diminish the expenses of suitors. One great object of the Bill was, to free from all suspicion the proceedings in the offices connected with the Court of Chancery. This object would be effected, he thought, by substituting salaries for fees, by which some of the officers were now paid the chief part of their incomes, and by abolishing what was called copy-money and gratuities altogether. In short, the Bill he proposed to introduce would impart greater justice and accuracy to the proceedings of every branch of the Court of Chancery. The following would be the list of the reductions in the offices to which he had alluded:—In the Six-Clerks-office a saving of 29,000 l. would be effected; in the Report-office, a saving of 4,300 l.; in the Registrar's-office of 10,500 l.; in the Masters'-office of 11,157 l.; which, with the further fees now received in those offices, to be abolished and compensated from the Suitors' fund, amounting to 14,000 l., would make a total saving of 68,957 l. a-year. He would say no more of the contemplated measure than this, that much confusion would be prevented by it in the administration of the proceedings of those different offices. The noble Lord concluded by moving the first reading of the Local Courts' Jurisdiction Bill, and repeated that he should present the Chancery Offices' Reduction Bill to their Lordships some day before the recess.
The Duke of Buckinghamdid not propose to follow the noble and learned Lord through any part of his explanation of the provisions of the measures he had introduced in the present state of the House. The Local Courts' Bill, however, appeared to him to be a measure calculated to produce the most important changes, and he really was anxious to have some further information on the subject. He wished to know, in the first place, whether the Local Courts were to be fixed, or whether it was intended that the Judges should go a Circuit? The next point on which he wished for information was as to the extent of the jurisdiction. Was there to be a local Court established in every county, or was the kingdom to be divided into districts?

1197
He also wished to know how the Sheriffs' Courts were to be dealt with, in what cases the trial was to be by Jury, and, in such cases, in what manner the Jury was to be selected and impanneled. As to the Courts of Reconcilement, he also wished to ask whether it was intended, in case the Judge could not reconcile the parties, after bringing them before him, that he was afterwards to try the action according to the common course of law?
The Lord Chancellorwould answer the last question put by the noble Duke in the first instance. For obvious reasons, the person who had endeavoured to reconcile the parties was not the person afterwards to try the cause. Such a person would have a bias on his mind, for he would probably have come to the conclusion that one of the parties was wrong, and, therefore, it was expressly provided by the Bill that when the Court of Reconcilement was unsuccessful, the cause should go for trial to the next Court of Local Jurisdiction. With respect to the Sheriff's Court, that would not be affected by the Local Courts' Bill. The writ of inquiry to assess damages was directed to the Sheriff", when there was judgment by default, and as those cases arose out of proceedings in the superior Courts, the Local Courts' Bill would have nothing whatever to do with them. He was obliged to the noble Duke for giving him an opportunity of explaining one or two other provisions of the Bill, which he had omitted to do in the first instance. The number of those Courts of Local Jurisdiction, and the extent of the jurisdiction as to place, would depend on the quantity of business that came before the Judges. It was intended to have certain districts. In some cases two or three counties might be included in a district. In all cases circuits would be appointed within the districts. The noble Duke would find, upon looking into the Bill, that it was provided that, at the commencement of every month (except the month of August, which was reserved for relaxation), the local Judge would commence trying the causes entered for trial, cause after cause, until the whole were disposed of. He was then to proceed to another part of the district, and so on to place after place, returning to that from which he set out, within a reasonable time, and avoiding the expense and loss consequent upon bringing witnesses and parties away from home. One part of this
1198
measure involved the abolition of the Courts for the recovery of small debts, many of which were to be found in different parts of the country. No action could be brought in any of those Courts for the recovery of small debts, where there was a better jurisdiction established under this Bill. Wherever a local Court was established, therefore, the Small-debt Courts would cease to act. Now there were rather more than 280 of those Courts established in different parts of the kingdom. Of those Courts many were totally inoperative. Some produced doubtful benefit, and another portion produced the very reverse of benefit—vexation, expense, and mischief. At the same time there were rights in individuals connected with those Courts, and some of them produced beneficial effects. In any case, where there was a Small-debt Court in beneficial existence, it was an argument pro tanto against the introduction of this measure in that district, and by the Bill a discretion was vested in the Crown to apply the provisions of the Bill or withhold them from certain districts, as might be deemed expedient. He did not suppose, however, that there were very many cases in which the constitution and practice of the Courts for the recovery of small debts, were wholly unexceptionable. As some persons had undoubted rights, however, by prescription and otherwise, as connected with those Courts, it was only just and fair that they should get compensation. In those cases this Bill proceeded upon what he contended was the only sound principle on which measures of legislative reform could proceed—the compensation of those whose just interests were effected by a measure of public improvement.
Bill read a first time.