LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he regretted the absence of the noble Marquess the Lord President of the Council (the Marquess of Lansdowne), inasmuch as he wished to call attention to a subject which he was sorry to be obliged to mention. He wished to give a general notice of his intention to submit to their Lordships' consideration an important question, which was now peculiarly pressed upon them on account of the acceptance (although he believed the appointment was not as yet completed) by his learned Friend, Serjeant Wilde, of the Lord Chief Justiceship of the Court of Common Pleas. One of the Acts which he deeply lamented he had ever permitted to pass their Lordships' House when he had the honour of holding the Great Seal, was that to which he was now about to refer. That most improper and wholly unconstitutional proceeding, however, did take place at the time he had the honour of holding office; and he did not mean but to say that he was in some degree responsible for that measure which allowed the salary of the Lord Chief Justice, to whom the Act of Parliament gave 10,000l. a year, and which Lord Tenterden was entitled to enjoy during his life, to be reduced to 8,000l. a year. Their Lordships permitted that arrangement to be made, though they should never have consented to it. His Lordship's executors—and if he were one of them he should feel bound to advise it—were entitled, he would show, to receive the 2,000l. a year which Lord Tenterden had abstained from taking. The Act was not a permissive Act, nor one giving power to the Treasury to make such a reduction; and it was wholly unconstitutional to make any learned judge dependent upon the mercy of the Treasury. The Acts of the 6th George IV., caps. 82 and 84 (the latter applying to the Common Pleas, to which his learned Friend Serjeant Wilde was appointed Lord Chief 1117 Justice), gave 10,000l. a year to the one Chief Justice, and 8,000l. to the other, payable by quarterly payments to themselves, out of the Consolidated Fund of Great Britain. He must remind the House of this fact, and observe how monstrous it would be because a Government was pleased to make a bargain with one Lord Chief Justice, by which he was to take less than he was really entitled to receive, and the residue to be paid into the Consolidated Fund—how monstrous it would be to continue the same course in respect to other Chief Justices; and perhaps to go still further, and say that they should have 6,000l. instead of 10,000l., and then to dole to them an increased 500l. a year, according as these learned judges behaved to the satisfaction of the Crown. He hoped and trusted that something would be done to amend this defect in their proceedings. He had not seen any Act that had passed on this subject since the 6th Geo. IV., although he had certainly an impression on his mind that some Act of the kind had passed their Lordships' House. He had abstained from bringing this question before the House at an earlier period only because his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench had entreated him not to bring it forward, because of the pain which any discussion on the point would cause him, and the motives to which a reference to it might be attributed. A judge more utterly beyond all possibility of being influenced by such considerations than his noble and learned Friend, had never existed; and a man caring less about money than the present Lord Chief Justice, was not to be found in the Queen's dominions. That, however, was no reason why he should now abstain from bringing this subject forward, when, perhaps, they would have a repetition of the same traffic. Such a proceeding, he thought, was greatly to be reprobated—that when an Act of Parliament assigned to a particular office a certain salary, a lower salary, by an arrangement between those who were not entitled to make the arrangement, should be given. At present no Act—and he could not find one—had passed to alter the former statutes. The Act said distinctly that the Lord Chief Justice should receive the salary of 10,000l., whereas the financial accounts showed that he only received 8,000l. a year.
§ EARL GREYsaid, he could not deny that the subject to which the noble and 1118 learned Lord had called the attention of the House was one of great importance. He understood his noble and learned Friend to complain that some arrangement had been made some years ago as to the salaries of the Lords Chief Justices, which was not in conformity with the law applying to that subject. Their Lordships would recollect that, in 1830, there was appointed a Committee of the other House of Parliament, by whom the salaries of all the great officers of State were revised, and in many instances reduced. All the principal officers of the Government had their salaries reduced; and, in respect to judicial officers, an arrangement was made that, prospectively, those salaries also should be reduced. Afterwards, however, when a vacancy in the office of Chief Justice of the King's Bench (as it then was) arose, the proper mode of carrying the intended reduction into effect was not adopted. He was very sorry that such was the case; but, if his noble and learned Friend thought it so objectionable, he greatly wondered that, at the time, he did not do that which was so perfectly simple and easy to do—that is, pass an Act of Parliament to sanction the arrangement which had been made, instead of letting it stand merely as a matter of arrangement. In point of form, it would, no doubt, have been better that such an Act had been passed; but, practically, there being no difference between the two modes of accomplishing the same thing, no evil had been done. His noble and learned Friend had paid a just compliment to the character of his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench; but, even if there had been a man of a different character to deal with, there could be no such abuse of power as the noble and learned Lord appeared to think possible: the actual payments appeared in the finance accounts; the transaction attracted the attention of the public; and any practical abuse was therefore altogether out of the question. He, however, so far agreed with his noble and learned Friend as to think that in these matters form should be strictly adhered to. It must be recollected, that his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) was specially intrusted with the conduct of the business at the time it took place; it was his province to see that nothing was done wrongly; and certainly he, at the time, took no step in the matter.
§ EARL GREYOn my own personal authority, I can contradict that. My noble and learned Friend, I know, did know it.
§ EARL GREYI know as well as possible that my noble and learned Friend was informed of the arrangement.
LORD BROUGHAMNo doubt I was cognizant of the arrangement after it was made; it must have been communicated to me.
§ EARL GREYsaid, that at that time the attention of the Government was particularly directed to the subject by the report of Lord Ashburton's Committee, and many salaries were reduced in consequence. The noble and learned Lord was Lord Chancellor at the time, and must have been aware of the proceeding, for it could not have taken place without his sanction. There could be no doubt then that the noble Lord was cognizant of and authorized what had taken place, for it was his business more than that of any other Member of the Government to look into the matter. In consequence of what had taken place, he could say, that he was sure that his noble Friend at the head of the Government would direct his attention to the subject; and, if it was deemed necessary, a Bill would be brought forward, so that a more regular form of proceeding might be adhered to.
LORD BROUGHAMhad not addressed himself to the noble Earl, but to a noble Lord, who at the time held a much higher office in the Government than the noble Earl, and who would naturally know more about the matter. The noble Earl had taken upon himself to say, on his own personal knowledge, that he (Lord Brougham) knew that at the time which he on his honour stated that he was ignorant of. He had asked for information from the real head of the Government in that House, the noble Marquess, whose absence he regretted; and he (Lord Brougham) stated, that he was not aware of the circumstance at the time; but the noble Earl must get up and contradict him, and say that he did know of it. When, however, the noble Earl proceeded, it appeared that he (Lord Brougham) must know of it, because he was Lord Chancellor at the time, therefore it was that he probably knew of it. So that it appeared 1120 that this actual knowledge about which the noble Earl was so peremptory, had dwindled down to probable knowledge only. Now, the facts of the case were these: he (Lord Brougham) did not know of the proceeding until he received a communication from two learned Judges, the late Mr. Justice Bosanquet and Mr. Justice Patteson, remonstrating on the step that had been taken after the arrangement had taken place. The noble Earl had stated, that he ought to have done that under the circumstances which the noble Earl was himself unable to do, viz., pass an Act of Parliament under circumstances which it was impossible to do; that is, to pass an Act when he was, as the noble Earl was himself now, in a minority in that House. And what would have happened if he had brought in a Bill on the subject? Why, it would have been thrown out. But he should not have approved of any Bill of the kind; for he thought that 10,000l. a year was a fit and proper salary of the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench. An appointment had just been made to the office of Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and this induced him to bring forward the subject. The salaries of the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench had been fixed at 10,000l. a year, and of the Common Pleas at 8,000l. a year, by Act of Parliament. The noble Earl, however, said that they were justified in going from this, not by a more recent Act of Parliament, nor by a report, or resolutions of both Houses, and sanctioned by the Crown, but by a report of a Committee of the other House, without any Act having passed. He was not learnt in this fashion in the Constitution of England, that a Resolution of a Committee of the House of Commons should be an equivalent for an Act of Parliament. The noble Earl, however, said that it was of no consequence—that it would not be abused; he added, however, that it might be better, as a matter of form, to have an Act, but still everybody would be able to know what was received, so that no abuse would exist. This 'everybody would assent' meant anybody might do so. This 'everybody' was a most convenient person to enable any one to escape from a difficulty, and to put forward when it was desirable that no one should be responsible. When they abolished the sale of offices of the courts by the Judges—and up to that period, the proceeding was perfectly legal—they increased the salary of the Lord 1121 Chief Justice to 10,000l. a year. What he objected to was, that when the Act of Parliament said that the learned person filling that office should have 10,000l. a year, the Government made a private bargain, so that he should receive only 8,000l. If this proceeding was sanctioned, the greatest mischief might be produced, as the Government might be inclined to dole out what additional salaries it pleased to the Judges. But it was said that this would be seen in the Estimates; but this again was everybody's business, to look after which, after all, nobody might do. He had put to the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas a question on this point—and no one could be more entitled to the full amount than that learned person, above all, considering the large professional emoluments he received—namely, as to whether he was aware of the cutting down of the salary of that officer from 8,000l. to 7,000l. a year, and he said no, and that he should think twice before he took it.
LORD CAMPBELLmust agree entirely with his noble and learned Friend opposite, that things should not remain as they were; and that, if it were necessary, an Act of Parliament ought to be immediately brought in to remedy the defect. The salaries of the Judges ought not to depend upon any arrangement between the Judges and the Government. Now, his noble Friend who sat near him had intimated no opinion on this subject—on the contrary, he had stated in the most distinct terms that the noble Lord now at the head of the Government would inquire into it, and that if it were necessary an Act of Parliament should be introduced for remedying the matter. There could be no doubt that if there had been an Act of Parliament passed, if Lord Denman or any of his executors chose to insist on their rights, they would be entitled to recover the balance of the whole of the specified salary. His noble and learned Friend opposite ought, if he felt that these matters required a remedy, to have brought in an Act when he occupied the seat on the Woolsack; he was the party that should have seen that all these things were right. His noble and learned Friend had said that he could not have carried such a Bill. He (Lord Campbell) knew that his noble and learned Friend had carried Bills despite of the large majorities with which his measures were threatened; and he also knew that if he had introduced a Bill on this subject, it would have passed both Houses 1122 of the Legislature with perfect unanimity. His noble and learned Friend could not say that he disapproved of the arrangement, as he continued to hold the Great Seal; and he (Lord Campbell) knew his spirit and his courage too well to suppose that had he failed in carrying such a measure he would not have continued to hold office; he would not suffer his opinion on such a subject to be overruled. His noble and learned Friend threw great blame on himself for this proceeding, and appeared to feel that he had been greatly in the wrong; and in this he (Lord Brougham) reminded him of the Pope who, finding himself in error, exclaimed "Judice me cremari," "I condemn myself, and order myself to be burnt."
The LORD CHANCELLORagreed with his noble and learned Friend that it was irregular to reduce the salaries of the Judges without an Act of Parliament; there ought to have been an Act of Parliament; and when his noble and learned Friend found out that the Lord Chief Justice's salary had been reduced, then he should have put it either into proper form, or the salary should have remained 10,000l. Either the salary ought to remain 10,000l., or there ought to be an Act of Parliament to make it 8,000l. His noble and learned Friend alluded to some supposed understanding with the present Lord Chief Justice; but he utterly disbelieved that anything of the kind had passed. He succeeded to the office, and of course succeeded to the office with all the emoluments belonging to it.
§ Subject at an end.