Sitting of 12 March 1852

MINUTES.
NEW MEMBERS SWORN—For Midhurst, Rt. Hon. Spencer Horatio Walpole; for Droitwich, Rt. Hon. Sir John Somerset Pakington, Bart.; for Stamford, Rt. Hon. John Charles Herries; for Oxford County, Rt. Hon. Joseph Warner Henley; for Essex (Northern Division), Rt. Hon. William Beresford; for Abingdon, Sir Frederick Thesiger; for Colchester, Rt. Hon. Lord John James Robert Manners; for Portarlington, Francis Plunkett Dunne, Esq.; for Buckingham Borough, Marquess of Chandos; for Dorset, Rt. Hon. George Bankes; for York County (East Riding), Hon. Arthur Duncombe; for Wenlock, Hon. George Cecil Weld Forester.
NEW WRITS.—For Salop County (Southern Division, v. Viscount Newport, Vice-Chamberlain of Her Majesty's Household; for East Retford, Viscount Galway, Lord in Waiting upon Her Majesty.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1° Office of Messenger to the Great Seal Abolition.
2° St. Albans Disfranchisement.

BRITISH ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY BILL.
Order for Second Reading read; Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
MR. J. L. RICARDOsaid, he rose to oppose the Motion. He did so because he believed the extraordinary powers sought by the company were such as ought not to be granted, and because they were perfectly unprecedented. It was matter for observation that the hon. Gentleman who had the charge of the Bill did not venture to say one word in its favour, although it had been intimated to him that it would be opposed. The principal allegation put forth in support of the Bill was, that the "Old Electric Telegraph Company" possessed a monopoly, and that it was desirable to destroy that monopoly; but he would venture to state that no company had ever encountered greater competition than that company had done for the last two years, and he could also state that no public company had ever given greater satisfaction. It should be remembered that the British Electric Telegraph Company was already in operation and had been competing with the old company, and they were now asking Parliament to assist them in that competition by conferring on them powers which no other company ever possessed. They asked to be invested with powers of entering compulsorily upon any railway or canal in the United Kingdom, in order to lay down telegraphs and apparatus for their own private benefit; and to
962
remove, either permanently or temporarily, as their occasion or convenience might require in respect of their works, all obstructions or impediments which existed, or might exist, in railways or canals, or the lands and premises adjoining, and belonging thereto. This was asking for powers over railways such as no other Electric Telegraph Company enjoyed. He I would not dwell upon the danger to which the public might be exposed in consequence of such an extraordinary interference being allowed with the railways; but he begged to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade to a new principle which was at tempted to be laid down by this Bill. Heretofore it had always been understood, that when one man or one company invaded the premises of another—as in the case of a railway company running a railway through a gentleman's demesne, it was on terms of mutuality that such a proceeding was permitted—the gentleman whoso premises were invaded being known to be entitled to an equitable compensation; but in the present instance there was no such reciprocity. The premises of the; railway company were to be at any moment liable to invasion by the British Electric Telegraph Company, whenever they wanted to lay down their pipes, tubes, and: wires; but no reciprocal advantage was insured to the railway company. If the principle of this Bill were now to receive the sanction of the House, they should eventually have to extend the same principle to Bills for the regulation, not of electric telegraphs only, but also of gas works and water works. What he desired was, that the House would not give to the British Electric Telegraph Company advantages which other companies did not possess. He begged to move that the; Bill be read a second time that day six months.
SIR DE LACY EVANSseconded the Motion.
Amendment proposed, "To leave out the word 'now,' and at the end of the Question to add the words 'upon this day six months.'"
MR. FARRERsaid, he was not astonished that the hon. Gentleman (Mr. J. L. Ricardo) should object to the Bill, which was opposed to the interests of his own; company; but he was astonished that he I should object to allowing their proposal to go before a Committee of the House. The objections which the hon. Gentleman (Mr.

963
J. L. Ricardo) had urged were rather those which ought to be adduced before a Select Committee. The real ground of objection to the Bill was, that it interfered with a monopoly. The hon. Gentleman says that the company he has been connected with has been working satisfactorily for two years, and that he does not object to fair competition; well, then, if that be so, let him prove his case in a Committee, and if the powers asked for are so extraordinary that they ought not to be granted, a Committee would curb and restrain them, refusing all that would be injurious to the safe working of railways. It had been said that great pecuniary loss might arise to the public by the House sanctioning these projects; but was it likely that a commercial trading company would incur a great risk, and a heavy expense, by attempting to lay down a line of telegraphic communication on a railway where the demand for its employment would be so little as to preclude the least prospect of a profitable return? While he considered the objections of the hon. Gentleman to the Bill to be wholly unfounded, he begged to remind the House that there existed out of doors a very strong desire to have the Bill at least submitted to a Select Committee, where its merits might be determined on. He hoped the House would adopt the course usually taken, and allow the Bill to be read a second time, that it might be sent to a Committee upstairs.
SIR DE LACY EVANSsaid, the House seemed to assume that the opponents of the Bill were desirous of retaining a monopoly; now this was not the case; the British Electric Telegraph Company had already got their Bill, they were already established, and the present Bill was only one to amend the former; it, however, sought such arbitrary and enormous powers, that he considered it his duty to oppose it. The principle of this Bill went further than that of any other similar measure. They desire compulsory powers to construct their particular machinery upon any railway they please. Unless, therefore, it was to be understood that all other telegraph companies were to have like powers, he should certainly oppose the Motion for reading the Bill a second time.
MR. MACGREGORwould not go into the merits of this Bill, because that was a subject for the Committee. But he would say that there was a strong desire in the great towns of the north of England for
964
some improvement in the present system of conveying intelligence. The merchants and manufacturers complained that the intelligence transmitted by electric agency was very unsatisfactorily performed. He thought that not only the old company, but this company, should receive powers to enable them to do all that they professed. He could assure the House that in the great northern towns there was a most earnest desire that this Bill should go into a Committee. The Bill involved the convenience and interests of all who were engaged in the commercial transactions of the country.
COLONEL THOMPSONsaid, that he possessed a list of some of the most respectable manufacturers, merchants, and traders in the country, who were anxious that the Bill should be sent to a Select Committee, as it had an important bearing upon the best interests of the country.
MR. MOWATTsaid, he had not the slightest personal interest to serve in the matter; but he had listened with great alarm to the objections made against the Bill, lest the House, in ignorance of its object, should be induced to throw it out. The promoters of the Bill, besides their own private interests, which were always implied in commercial speculations, sought to confer an immense advantage on the public by asking to be allowed to avail themselves of the facilities which the railways afforded for establishing telegraph lines, by which a general communication might be carried out through all parts of the kingdom. Surely that could not be an objectionable principle. It was said that they sought for compulsory powers; of course they did. Unless they possessed such powers, they would be, as hitherto they had been, entirely at the mercy of the railway body, who, in a majority of cases, had refused to allow the establishing of telegraphic communication on their lines. It was said, again, that the powers now asked were such as would interfere with the private rights of railway companies. Surely that was an objection which came with a very bad grace from the directors of railways, whose very existence depended on the powers they possessed of interfering with private property. But all that he would at present urge was, that the Bill was one of too important a character to justify its being rejected on the second reading.
MR. GLYNsaid, that there already existed telegraphic communications on the principal lines of railway, and he had yet

965
to learn that the employment of a double amount of capital for effecting one and the same object was the readiest means of bringing about a reduction of charges to the public. Was it not well known whenever two companies obtained similar rights over the same district of country, that instead of encountering each other on the competitive principle, they in a short time combined for their mutual protection and advantage? It was, therefore, a mistaken idea that a reduction of charge would be effected by introducing two electric telegraphic companies in the same line of district, instead of one. But he claimed of the House some little consideration on the part of the railway companies. This Bill would introduce a principle hitherto deemed wholly objectionable. It was proposed to confer on the British Electric Telegraph Company a forcible and compulsory power of entering on the property of railway companies for the purpose of carrying out their own objects. Should such a principle be introduced, it would henceforth he impossible for the directors of railways to be responsible for the proper management of the lines under their control, or to undertake to be answerable for the public safety. The principle of public safety was paramount to any other considerations that had yet been urged on the attention of the House, and he hoped it would be of sufficient weight to induce the House to support the Amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
MR. ROEBUCKsaid, he understood the object of the Bill to be to do away with a monopoly. His hon. Friend (Mr. J. L. Ricardo) who moved the Amendment had said that the Bill was based upon a novel principle. He (Mr. Roebuck) admitted it. But the whole thing was itself a novelty. Railways were novelties. Railway companies, represented by his hon. Friend (Mr. Glyn), were creatures of the law. The Legislature had made them, and had given them special powers for certain public purposes. It was not dealing with them as private individuals, or with their property as private property. What was asked by this Bill was, to do away with a monopoly. The first telegraph company, having been incoporated by Act of Parliament, had made certain agreements with the railway companies. Now, if by virtue of those agreements a power was possessed, either by the railway companies, or by the Telegraph Company, at any point of a railway between Lon-
966
don and its terminus, to prevent any other person or company from entering upon it, the consequence might be that all communications from that point to other parts of the country might be entirely cut off. He would state, in the hearing of his hon. Friend (Mr. Glyn), that a railway company had entered into an agreement with the old Electric Telegraph Company, one of the terms of which was that the railway company should not allow any other person to go on their line for the purpose of making telegraphic communications. The consequence was that London was cut off from a large portion of the country by means of that agreement.
MR. J. L. RICARDO: I only have to say that the hon. and learned Member for Sheffield has entirely misconceived me, if he understands me as having said that the London and North-Western Railway Company, and the Electric Telegraph Company, of which I am chairman, have ever entered into any understanding to cut off the telegraphic communication between London and any other place. I never said so.
MR. ROEBUCKhad never said that the hon. Gentleman had made any such statement. He said that such things might occur; and he was disposed to find fault with the hon. Member rather for concelaing than divulging them. He (Mr. Roebuck) would be quite prepared, supposing this Bill should pass, to give his hon. Friend (Mr. J. L. Ricardo) exactly the same powers for the company of which he was chairman, as the Bill would confer on the British Electric Telegraph Company; but he certainly was not prepared to take the extraordinary step of preventing the second reading of a Private Bill upon such grounds as had now been urged. If the powers sought were considered improper to be given, a Select Committee was the best tribunal to determine that point. By rejecting the Bill on the second reading, they would at the same time perpetuate a monopoly and inflict injustice; but by referring the Bill to a Select Committee, they would act with safety towards the promoters of the measure, while the rights of the public would be protected. It was a well-known fact that the telegraphs in England were not employed to one-tenth the extent they might be; and why? Because they existed under a system of monopoly. He wished to see this country possess the same advantages from electric telegraphs as were enjoyed by their brethren in the United States of America.

967
The everyday transactions of life were there communicated from the northern to the southernmost point of that vast continent. That was a benefit which the people of England did not enjoy. By allowing the Bill to be read a second time they would do no injury to any human being, nor would they infringe upon any private property whatever, for, as he had already said, railways were not private property, but they would be giving the people of this country the chance of enjoying the benefits of the greatest discovery of modern times.
Question put, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
The House divided:—Ayes 210; Noes 60: Majority 150.
Main Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read 2°.

THE ARCTIC EXPEDITION.
MR. CHISHOLM ANSTEYbegged to ask the hon. Secretary to the Admiralty whether Captain Penny and the other mercantile officers of the late expedition in search of Sir John Franklin received any and what rewards for their acknowledged services in such expedition? Whether Captain Austin and the officers of that expedition received any and what rewards for their acknowledged services on the same occasion? If it was true that Queen Victoria Channel and the Northern and Northwestern Passages, for the exploration of which Captain Austin's vessels are now fitting out under Sir Edward Belcher, were discovered by Captain Penny and the mercantile marine under his command, when employed on the late expedition? If there is any intention to accept Captain Penny's offers of service, and to employ him and his two vessels again for the purpose of such exploration, or in any other way connected with the new expedition? And if not, why Captain Penny's offers had been declined? He also begged to move for all correspondence on the above subjects not already before Parliament.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he could not tell whether the answer he had to give the hon. and learned Gentleman would be satisfactory. It was, however, decisive and final. With respect to the first question, he had to say that Captain Penny and the other mercantile officers of the expedition had not received any reward for their services in search of Sir Jon Franklin. With respect to the second question, he had to reply that Captain Austin and the naval officers of the expedition had received pro-
968
motion in reward of their services. In reference to the third question respecting the Queen Victoria Channel and the Northern and North-Western Passages, he (Mr. Stafford) considered it was rather a question for scientific and professional men than for that House; but he might say that the North-Western Passage had not been discovered as yet, and that, therefore, Captain Penny and the mercantile marine under his command had not discovered it. Touching the fourth question, he had to say that there was no intention on the part of the Admiralty to accept Captain Penny's offers of service, or to employ him and his two vessels again for the purpose of such exploration, or in any way connected with the new expedition. Why those offers had been declined, it was for the late Government to say; it had been decided by the late Board, for reasons which had been considered sufficient by them, not to employ Captain Penny; and the Admiralty had resolved not to reverse the decision come to by their predecessors in office. As regarded the correspondence alluded to in the last question of the hon. and learned Gentleman, he (Mr. Stafford) was not aware of the existence of any on the subject which had not been already laid before Parliament. If, however, the hon. and learned Gentleman would state what papers he desired, and moved for their production, he (Mr. Stafford) would give the matter his best consideration.
SIR ROBERT H. INGLISfeared that the late Admiralty, and he almost feared the present Board, had forgotten that once upon a time there existed such a man as Mr. James Cook, for they really seemed to fancy that Her Majesty's Royal Navy had a right to monopolise all the discoveries which might be made by skill and enterprise. Eighty or ninety years ago that was not the doctrine of the then Board of Admiralty; and the consequence was, that they found such individuals as "Mr." James Cook—as some of the officers of the Royal Navy now-a-days would have presumed to call him—the master of a collier, who rendered the name of England dignified by the discoveries he had made. He did say that the treatment which Captain Penny had received from different individuals had not been such as would tend to encourage in any, except in officers of Her Majesty's Navy, that zeal for national discovery which was so manifested in the middle of the last century. But this was not only a question of national

969
discovery, or a question of science; it was a question of humanity. He believed that Captain Penny, whether he made the special discovery of the North-Western Passage or not, had penetrated further than any other man; and, therefore, when it seemed to be thought almost a merit in the present and the late Boards of Admiralty that they had given Captain Penny no reward, they would, in his opinion, have done their duty as well, and have met the justice of the case far better, if they had encouraged Captain Penny to continue those discoveries which he had commenced, and which he had prosecuted more satisfactorily than, or at least as satisfactorily as, any other persons employed in the expedition; and it would have redounded to the honour of the late Board of Admiralty if, instead of leaving the services of such a man unrequited, they had rewarded him in a manner in some degree commensurate with the intrepidity, energy, and devotion, which had so signally characterised his conduct. He would venture further to express a hope that Her Majesty's present Board of Admiralty would not lose a day in preparing the expedition upon which their predecessors in office had resolved. It might not he necessary that that expedition should sail on the 10th or the 15th of April; but he would say, that every day that it was delayed after the earliest time at which it could be got ready would be a day lost, not to the cause of discovery, but to the great cause of suffering humanity; and he was sure the House would readily support the Board in urging forward that expedition.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, that strenuous exertions were being made to bring the new expedition into a state of readiness with all possible despatch.
MR. PARKERregretted that his right hon. Friend the late First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir F. Baring) was not in his place that evening to take part in this discussion; and in his absence he (Mr. Parker) did not know that he could give any satisfactory explanation on the subject now under debate. This, however, he could assure the House, that his right hon. Friend had exercised his best discretion in the decision come to relative to the Arctic Expeditions; in order to attain that object which this House and the country at large had so much in view, namely, the recovery, if possible, of Sir John Franklin and his fellow-explorers, or, at any rate, the ascertaining what had been their fate. His (Mr. Parker's)
970
right hon. Friend had taken infinite pains in the matter; he had left nothing undone, for he felt that he would be secure of the support of the House and the approbation of the people at large in any expenditure. To find fault, in the absence of his right hon. Friend, with the course which he had taken, did not seem to him to be quite fair. The choice of officers for such an expedition involved a delicate discretion, and he doubted whether this House was a fit place to discuss the merits of officers. He did not know whether his right hon. Friend, had he been present, would have thought proper to enter into the reasons which had induced the Board to decline to send out Captain Penny; and he (Mr. Parker), holding, as he had done, but a subordinate position in the department, could not be expected to go into those reasons.
CAPTAIN SCOBELLwished to call the attention of the Admiralty to the propriety of scattering the ships employed in the next expedition more than had been done in the previous one. Some six or eight vessels appeared to have been almost within hail of each other, so that they had not an opportunity of very extensive survey. Boat expeditions had, it was true, been made over the ice, but the results had been very far from satisfactory. As to Captain Penny, he had read with great minuteness every thing that had come before Parliament on the question, and he did think that the exertions—he might say successful exertions—of Captain Penny had been more prominent, or as prominent, as those of any one employed throughout the whole expedition. It was much to that gentleman's credit that lie did not go to seek promotion, but had joined the expedition, running the same risks as those who went out also from very noble motives, but who hoped thereby to advance themselves.
ADMIRAL BERKELEYsaid, he was prepared to assume his share of the responsibility of not having appointed Captain Penny to the Arctic Expedition. That conclusion had not been come to without due deliberation; it bad not been come to without, in the first place, the consultation of every officer who had visited those regions; and he was of opinion that if Captain Penny had been sent out with the present expedition, it would not have been for the interest of the object in view.
Subject dropped.
The several dropped Orders were then disposed of.

PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION BILL.
On the Order of the Day for the Second Reading of the Parliamentary Representation Bill,
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid: With respect to this Bill, Sir, I do not at all intend to make any observations which can have the effect of provoking a debate. I only wish to say that I brought in this Bill as the Minister of the Crown, and in pursuance of a recommendation contained in Her Majesty's most gracious Speech from the Throne. I do not think that I should be able, as an individual Member of Parliament, to carry a measure of such importance through the House with success. For this reason I do not propose proceeding with the Bill in the course of the present Session; but it is to be understood that, by this determination, I shall not preclude myself from any opportunity of moving (if I should think right to do so) any resolution on the subject of the extension of the suffrage, and the amendment of Parliamentary representation. I beg to move that the second reading of this Bill he postponed until this day three months. With regard to the Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill, I do not intend to withdraw that measure.
MR. HUMEsaid, he could not but regret the course which the noble Lord had determined to take with respect to the Parliamentary Representation Bill. That measure he had introduced in his capacity of Minister of the Crown, and if the measure was indeed a valuable one, the change in the position of the noble Lord could be no argument in favour of its withdrawal. He (Mr. Hume) confessed that he regarded it as a very defective measure, but it nevertheless was a step in the right direction, and it might have been improved in Committee. He could not understand why the noble Lord should not, by persevering in the measure, have afforded that House an opportunity of recording its opinion on the subject of reform. The country had reason to complain that, after nineteen years' experience of the inadequacy of the Reform Bill, some measure had not been introduced by the noble Lord to remedy the defects of that law, and to enlarge the franchise of the people. The noble Lord ought certainly to have persevered in his Bill, if only to ascertain the true feeling of the House on the subject of reform.
MR. W. WILLIAMSwas quite sure that the course proposed by the noble Lord would give universal satisfaction, for never was there a measure proposed which gave such universal dissatisfaction. He was glad to hear, however, that the noble Lord had not abandoned the cause of reform, though he had abandoned the Bill, and he hoped that, when he next brought forward a measure of reform, it would be a better one than the last.
MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, he also regretted that the Bill had been withdrawn by the noble Lord, though he thoroughly acquiesced in the opinion that it was a most defective and unsatisfactory measure. The Bill, bad as it was, was not perhaps so hopelessly worthless that it might not, perhaps, have been susceptible of amendment in Committee. It was no new practice to put one Bill in Committee, and to bring out a totally different one. The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, of which the noble Lord and his Colleagues were now, perhaps, thoroughly ashamed—at least he hoped so—had come out of Committee with scarcely a vestige of the original Bill being left in it. Why should not the same thing occur in the case of the Parliamentary Representation Bill. It was the noble Lord's own Bill, and he, of course, had a right to do what he liked with it. Why did he not either proceed with it, or withdraw it at once? Why did he propose to postpone it only for three months? The fact was, that the noble Lord had no faith in the measure. He knew that it was utterly valueless, and that, like his own Cabinet, it would fall without awakening a single regret, and without a single hand being stretched out to save it. He (Mr. Duncombe) did not mean to say one word to disturb the repose which, by general understanding, was to be accorded to those hon. and right hon. Gentlemen who delighted in the designation of the "country party." The members of that party were to be left in perfect tranquillity until Monday, on which day it was to be hoped that they would come down to the House well prepared to receive the compliments of the Session, which no doubt would be bountifully prepared for them, and gracefully tendered. But he would take leave to ask those Members who were not connected with the country party, whether this question of Parliamentary Reform was to stop where it now was The House would recollect what happened last year when the

973
hon. Member for East Surrey (Mr. L. King) brought in a Bill to assimilate the borough and county voters, which was carried by a majority of two to one. On that occasion the noble Lord said, "Don't press this measure, and I will undertake to bring forward next Session a more comprehensive scheme of reform." Upon that-understanding many of the Gentlemen who had voted for the second reading of the hon. Member's Bill turned round and kicked it out; and now here we were. It was true that in Schedule B there was a mass of corruption and abomination which had disgusted everybody, and it was equally true that there were many questions in the Bill which ought to have formed distinct and separate enactments. At that time he reminded the noble Lord that delays were dangerous; but, however, on the understanding that we were to have in the present Session a good Reform Bill, the measure to which he alluded was kicked out, and now, what with that Bill lost, and the present Bill withdrawn, what chance had we of reform from the hands of those who had declared against all reform? Were they to wait until the noble Lord came to office again? Assuredly not. It was not by waiting until a Ministry might find it convenient to introduce a popular measure that the noble Lord had achieved any reputation he possessed as a Parliamentary reformer. Before 1830, the noble Lord was always bringing in Reform Bills in the teeth of Lord Liverpool's Administration; and now he hesitated to pursue a similar course, although there was a party in power who had always been more inveterately hostile to reform than ever Lord Liverpool was. That party hoped to get an accession of Protectionists at the next general election; and was it to be expected that, if they succeeded in that object, the prospects of Parliamentary reform would; be improved by such an event? He believed that nothing would give satisfaction to the country unless the noble Lord introduced the Bill himself.
MR. GRANTLEY BERKELEYsaid, he was not able to congratulate hon. Members on the Opposition benches upon their unanimity, or upon "following their leader." The noble Lord was, in his opinion, quite right in abandoning his Parliamentary Reform Bill, because it did not satisfy any single soul of either party.
Second Reading deferred till this day three months.

SUITORS IN CHANCERY RELIEF BILL.
Order for Committee read.
SIR W. P. WOODsaid, that, with reference to this Bill, which now stood for Committee, he was quite willing to leave it in the hands of the Government. The Bill had been founded upon the Report of the Commission, who had given great attention to the subject, and he trusted that there would not be any unnecessary delay in the passing of the Bill. There was also another Bill, which had come down from the other House, the object of which was to abolish the office of Secretary to Bankrupt Commissioners, which he hoped would also be passed. Both of those measures he looked upon as highly necessary, and he trusted that the Government would take them up, as also a Bill for abolishing the office of Masters in Chancery.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, that, with reference to the first of the Bills to which the hon. and learned Gentleman had referred, the Lord Chancellor intended to make a statement that evening, in the other House of Parliament, which he trusted would be satisfactory to the country, as showing that his noble and learned Friend, who was as competent as any person alive, was willing and anxious to undertake a reform in the Court of Chancery; and the noble and learned Lord would, he (Mr. Walpole) understood, intimate his willingness and anxiety to undertake those measures of law reform which the late Government had originated. With regard to the Bill for the abolition of the office of Secretary of Bankrupts, the Government were prepared to take up the Bill. With reference to the Suitors in Chancery Relief Bill, he concurred in the anxiety expressed by his hon. and learned Friend that the Bill should be passed into law; but there was one portion of it—namely, whether suitors in the Court of Chancery should be charged a per centage of fees—to which he had objected when the Bill was before a Select Committee, and with reference to which he should propose an amendment. With this view he would propose that the Committee be postponed for a few days.
Committee thereupon deferred till Monday next.

ST. ALBANS DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
MR. WALPOLEmoved the Second Reading of the St. Albans Disfranchisement Bill.
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that the

975
Bill had been brought in by the late Government, in consequence of the Report of a Royal Commission, which had inquired into the system of bribery and corruption in the borough. He hoped the Bill would be persevered in; but having said thus much, he was prepared to leave the matter in the hands of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
MR. JACOB BELLsaid, it was not to be expected that he should allow this Bill to pass its second reading without making an expiring effort to save the borough he represented. However strong might be the prejudice of the House, and however forlorn the hope of success, he should not flinch from his duty to his constituents. The subject of Parliamentary elections was one in which he had never taken any interest till the time when he found himself heralded forth to the public as if he had been the inventor of a system which had existed long before he was born, and would probably prevail long after he had ceased to exist. Though the defence of the system would be quite impossible—for no one in the House detested Parliamentary corruption more than he did, or had greater reason to detest it—yet it was quite a different question whether it was just and proper to execute the sentence of the law in the manner proposed on the borough of St. Albans. He thought he might advance some pleas which would have influence with the House. First, it was customary, when several parties were arraigned under the same charge, and one turned Queen's evidence, that that one should be acquitted, while the others were punished. In the present instance, the borough of St. Albans had turned Queen's evidence, and had placed in possession of the House some very valuable information, which would enable them to pursue corruption with success throughout the kingdom; yet the only borough to be punished was the one which had rendered this important service. Again, when a confession was extorted from any party under a promise of indemnity from punishment, it was unjust, and he believed illegal, to take advantage of that confession as a ground for inflicting punishment. Now the Commissioners had stated in their report that their reception in St. Albans, and the frank and candid manner in which they were furnished with information, contrasted very favourably with the reception which other Commissioners, having a similar
976
object in view, had met with in another borough. The Commissioners attributed this to the stringent powers with which they were invested under the Act, but he attributed it rather to the implicit reliance of the witnesses upon the good faith and honour of Parliament; and it would be a violation of both, if Parliament were now to turn round and use those confessions as a pretext for punishment. It might be said that the indemnity from punishment did not refer to the borough in its corporate capacity, but to the penalties or imprisonment incurred by individuals who were guilty of bribery. But it was usual to construe the words of an Act of Parliament in their plain meaning. The words of the Act appointing the late Commission were, that the party who should answer, to the best of his knowledge, the questions put by the Commissioners, should be indemnified from all forfeitures, punishments, disabilities, and incapacities; and the words of the Act implied that such a person should enjoy every power and privilege that he possessed before. And yet how could such a promise be held to be performed if these parties were to be deprived of the franchise, and their borough exterminated? As he had been held up to public animadversion for corrupt practices, he would assume, for the sake of argument, that there was some foundation for this charge, and that he had had some experience on this subject. He had bought this experience at his own expense, and he intended to make use of it for the benefit of the public. The Bill now before the House was one of three which had been brought forward for the ostensible purpose of putting an end to bribery and corruption; and he could show that the three together would not effect the object. In all reform discussions he had ever heard, either in the House or out of it, he had never heard any allusion made to what he believed was the primary and principal cause of corruption—the extreme severity of the laws against it, whereby they had become inoperative. He could produce evidence of the fact that those laws were inoperative. At the last election for St. Albans, where every one might suppose there were abundant opportunities for carrying out those laws, a bill had been issued, stating the penalties incurred by giving or taking a bribe, and offering to prosecute any case, free of expense, on evidence being supplied—the reward of 1,000 l. or 500 l. to belong to the party

977
producing the evidence. This bill was signed by a gentleman who, at the time of the election, valued his services at ton guineas a day; and he offered those services gratuitously to any one who, in that rich harvest of corruption, would voluntarily bring forward a single offender. Yet, so inoperative was the law, that while (as it was afterwards proved) many of the electors were eager to sell themselves for 5l. and become slaves, there was not one to be found willing to be bought back again for 500 l. and become a free man. Every attempt at improvement, instead of seeking to render the laws easier to be carried into effect, had increased their stringency, and made it impossible to carry them out. During the fifteen months he had been in purgatory, he had made a great many inquiries on the subject—he knew very little of it before—and he found these laws were so excessively strict, and the penalties so tremendous, that it was utterly impossible to carry them into effect, and they consequently defeated the object they had in view. It was impossible to carry out any election consistently with the law. There were voters who came from a distance; and the common rites of hospitality were denied; they must not even have a glass of beer; and if the sitting Member, or any one in his behalf, were proved to have offered them any refreshment, he would be unseated. Were these laws literally carried into effect, many agents would be subject to accumulated penalties of about 150,000 l., and to an imprisonment of 300 or 400 years. That was the literal interpretation which anybody not a lawyer would put upon the law. When sheep-stealing was a capital crime, the majority of the offenders were not punished at all, and those who were punished only suffered on the same principle as St. Albans was to suffer now. Before going circuit, the Judges assembled sometimes, and said—"Sheep-stealing has been rather common lately, we had better hang a few prisoners;" and, on account of this determination, men suffered who never expected to be hanged at all. The criminal when condemned became an object of compassion with the benevolent; petitions were frequently presented to the Secretary of State in favour of such criminals; and the disgust of the crime was lost in the horror of the undue severity of the punishment. Owing to this stringency at elections, a custom had become prevalent which had acquired the
978
force of law. There were certain expenses which were illegal, but which, nevertheless, must be paid—not the purest election in the world could be conducted without them—and yet, in the strict letter of the law, they endangered the seat. Consequently it was necessary to employ various agents. The genus "Parliamentary agent" comprised several species. Those who performed what was called the "awkward business" must be cunning, ingenious, and energetic, and must have a contrivance at hand to meet every case. They must be indefatigable, fear nothing but defeat, care for nothing but victory. These agents, while performing the most slippery business behind the candidate's back, must convince him when in his presence that they were the purest persons in the world, and that if a shilling improperly spent could save his election, they would not expend it. They perpetrated the most unblushing wrong in the most daring manner. They had many methods of accomplishing their purpose, of which an example or two might be instructive. A Parliamentary agent of this kind had a room in some part of the town called a committee-room, but which the candidate never heard of. When an elector came he was ushered into the presence of the agent, who would say, "Well, Mr. Smith, how do you do to-day?" at the same time holding up three fingers, to signify he was to have three sovereigns. The elector would perhaps say, if he were dissatisfied with the amount, "I am not very well to-day." The agent then, holding up five fingers, would say, "I am sorry you are not well to-day, Mr. Smith." The elector would then say, "Oh, I am not very ill. It is all right." He would then go and look out of the window, and while he was doing so the agent would put five sovereigns upon the table. The agent would then go and look out of the window in his turn, and the elector would walk to the table, and when the agent turned round the elector was gone, and the sovereigns had vanished. The elector did not see the agent put down the money, and the agent did not see the elector take it up. When a Parliamentary Committee was appointed the agent swore he never gave any money, and the elector swore no one gave him any. No promise had been given or required; the subject of the election had not even been mentioned. The elector went out of the room a free agent, and, without perjury, swore he had not been bribed. When the five hon. Gentlemen

979
who sat upon the Committee heard this, they said, "There has been some clever management here, but there is no evidence." Then a learned gentleman in a wig would stand up and declare it to be a trumped-up case; that there was not a tittle of evidence against his client; and he called upon the Committee to dismiss the petition as frivolous and vexatious. This was only one method in which bribery was carried on. He had heard of fifteen or twenty guineas being given for a canary bird. There is another method which was much more easy to practise without risk of detection—that of employing people for various purposes, and paying them. There were usually a great number of agents, spies, secretaries, and messengers, all retained for five or six weeks preparatory to an election, and paid so much a week. These were put down as legal charges, though if thoroughly sifted, it would be found that almost the only service these people performed was at the hustings or polling booth. Some of the most important thus employed were spies, whose duty it was to be looking about among the people on the other side, and to obtain information as to what was going on; and thus it was that candidates knew of all the "awkward business" going on on the other side, but were kept in ignorance, being surrounded by a halo of their supporters, of what was done on their own. If, too, one of the candidates happened to be the cousin to an editor, or to have any interest with the press, he had an opportunity of putting all this tittle tattle into the newspaper, and thus all the scandal that his spies could get hold of came forth to the public in a very piquant state, while the other party was blackened very much to his surprise. He cautioned any Members who might be opposed by any hon. Gentleman connected with the press to be prepared for a denouement similar to that which had taken place lately at St. Albans. By degrees these agents acquired great influence in the borough, and were almost able to return Members themselves. It did not follow, however, that the agents selected the candidate. The party on whose side he usually acted might make the selection if they pleased, and retain the agent. An agent was like a lawyer in this respect; he did not care for whom he acted, but, once employed by a party in a borough, he set to work with great zeal. It was characteristic of an agent
980
not to be scrupulously accurate in minor pecuniary matters. Somehow or other money adhered to his hands in passing through them; but he was faithful to his party, and, like the Spartan boy, would allow his entrails to be torn out rather than betray the fox. It was felt that disgrace was not in bribing, but in being detected. But an agent might sometimes be caught tripping. He might become too venturesome from long impunity, and might at last find his way into prison. When there his friends would know nothing of him; but yet men did not scruple to visit him privately with a view to furthering their prospects at the next election. A man who had spent 20,000 l. in the most unblushing bribery, and was not petitioned against only because his opponent had bribed as much as himself, walked into the House as bold as brass, and inveighed against the corruption of St. Albans. A few words on the working of the present system. When an agent waited on a candidate it was usual to ask a few questions about Corn Laws, Jews, and Catholics, &c., and then his attention was directed to money matters. If applied to by one of the "awkward agents," he would probably, in the first instance, be asked for a certain sum of money to test the borough. This might be 100 l., 200 l., or 300 l., according to the appetite of the agent. The agent, like a fortune-teller, could not tell anything till his hand was crossed with money. He was next asked for 300 l., 400 l., or 500 l. for legal expenses. But this was not all, for there was a further sum to be paid some fourteen days after the Member had taken his seat; and, as to how this money was expended, he was told that he was not to ask any questions. If the candidate said, he would not sanction bribery, and that he liked to have everything above-board, the agent replied that he would have nothing to do with bribery, but that there were two or three persons who divided the borough amongst them, and if they did not get so much money they would not give their influence. He (Mr. Bell) was not an old stager in election tactics, he was not up to the tricks of the trade, and he consequently fell into the trap. The effect on the electors was quite as bad, it was perhaps even worse than the effect on the Members. They looked upon an election like a Christmas coming at an uncertain period. It made them care little for the politics of the candidates. If you

981
ask an elector what party he belongs to, he will probably tell you he goes with the "blues" or the "reds." If you ask him about the Corn Laws, he knows nothing about them, though he will tell you he would rather get a loaf at 6d. than at 1s. The effect on the public mind was equally bad, for when people knew that Members got into that House by these means, it was impossible to respect laws made by such parties. The people must despise the House, and the laws passed by it, and contemn the hypocrisy with which corrupt practices were branded by its Members. Bribery was a disease exactly like the smallpox. It was contagious and communicable from one person to another. Secondly, a person who had suffered badly from the disease was a marked man as long as he lived. Thirdly, the contagion only took effect in cases where susceptibility prevailed. Correct feeling would operate like vaccination to prevent the disease attacking the subject. The cure for bribery was to make people feel that it was disgraceful to give or accept a bribe. The notion was not Utopian. Even in St. Albans, he was informed, there were as many as 200 electors who would not be bribed. No Reform Bill of the kind hitherto introduced would cure the evil. It was proved before the St. Albans Commission that the Reform Bill increased the bribery very much; and if another Bill of the same kind were to be passed, it was impossible to calculate the extent to which corruption might increase. He did not believe that even the ballot would cure the evil, for the "awkward agent" would still contrive to know how much the candidate would stand, and he would bribe the electors conditionally upon the return of the party for whom he acted, paying the money after the election instead of before. The "Man in the Moon," or "the Man in the Helmet," or "the Hole in the Wall," would still continue to act as paymaster, to evade detection. He believed, therefore, that even with the ballot and small constituencies they would have as much bribery as before. There was a great deal of talk about St. Albans bribery, as if other places were not just as bad. The bribery at St. Albans was but a milkscore compared with the bribery which took place in a large constituency in the metropolis, which he would not name. Let them apply the proper cure to these things. Let them not enjoin penalties for bribery which they knew would
982
never be inflicted, but let the penalties be such as would be inflicted in every case of notorious bribery. Let them get rid of the absurdity of a trial by a Committee of five Members of that House, who might be as guilty of bribery themselves as the party whose case they were trying, and let them instead issue a Commission, as in the case of St. Albans, and compel all parties to give evidence. He could bear testimony to the excellent manner in which the St. Albans Commissioners conducted that inquiry, and he respected them as a child respected his father, who corrected him. A mouse was not more helpless before three bull terriers, than a witness was before those learned Commissioners. If one missed him, the next was sure to trip him up, and the third swallowed him. From the manner in which the inquiry was conducted before a Committee of that House, it was almost impossible to get at the truth, for as soon as a witness was about to state something to the point, the gentlemen in big wigs stopped his mouth. No one could be more grateful than he was for the exertions of his learned counsel before the Election Committee; but if he had been a Member of the Committee, he would have voted for unseating himself: for the corruption was so carefully bottled up, that though he saw no evidence, he smelt it, and could guess what was kept back, from what came out. He should use every exertion himself to put down bribery and corruption; but this Bill was not calculated to effect that object, unless other boroughs were put to the same ordeal as St. Albans. The electors of that borough were told that they would not be punished for giving their evidence; and though it was true that no fines had been levied, yet capital punishment was about to be inflicted, and that was worse than a fine. He claimed indulgence, therefore, for his borough. It was in the mud, and he was in the mud with it, but he would never shrink from performing his duty towards it. He would now move that the debate be adjourned; he would not say for three or six months, though that would answer his purpose very well, but simply that it be adjourned, as he expected a petition from some electors of St. Albans, which would throw some further light on the subject.
[The Amendment not having been seconded fell to the ground.]
MR. HUMEsaid, he wished to make a few observations on the original question.

983
In the first place, he could not refrain I from thanking Ministers for taking up this Bill, and should look upon it as an earnest of what they intended to do on the subject. The hon. Member for St. Albans (Mr. J. Bell) had admitted that if he had been on his own Committee he would have voted for unseating himself. After such an admission he thought he had only to appeal to hon. Gentlemen opposite in favour of the Bill. The explanations given by the Commissioners, who had done their duty so admirably at St. Albans, and the information which had been given as to bribery, induced him to hope that the Government would take up the whole question, and not allow St. Albans to remain an individual case. It was said that the bribery at St. Albans was only an example of what took place in some eighty or ninety other boroughs. If that were so, he hoped the House would be consistent, and adopt some means for changing the whole system, for it was the system which corrupted the candidates. If the Government would take up the subject in earnest, he should be happy to support them in any real substantial measure of reform.
SIR DE LACY EVANSthought it was somewhat hard that St. Albans alone should be plucked, when there were other boroughs equally guilty. He hoped the Government would not rest satisfied with the present Bill, but would deal with other corrupt boroughs in a similar way. He had given notice of a Motion for the disfranchisement of Harwich, and he hoped the Government would support his suggestion.
Bill read 2°.

PERSONAL ESTATES OF INTESTATES BILL.
Order for Committee read; House in Committee.
MR. G. A. HAMILTONsaid, that this was a Bill introduced by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Herefordshire (Mr. C. Lewis), and as it appeared to be a useful measure, Government did not oppose it.
Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.
Clause 5.
MR. CHISHOLM ANSTEYsaid, this Clause, in conjunction with the one that followed, gave power to the Commissioners of the Treasury to make regulations and pay money out of the Consolidated Fund to parties who had established claims in certain cases against the Crown. He thought, however, that these Clauses would
984
prejudice the right which persons had at present of proceeding in a Court of Law against the Treasury or the Crown, in matters to which the Bill referred. It proposed to refer claims to escheated property to Commissioners; but he thought persons ought still to retain the right of bringing such claims before a Court of Law.
The ATTORNEY GENERALapprehended there was nothing in the Bill which would interfere with the rights of persons who had such claims. In the 6th clause it was provided that any person who proved his claim should be paid the amount out of the Consolidated Fund. The Clause would not interfere in any way with his right to bring an action.
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, he agreed with the hon. and learned Attorney General, that there was nothing in the Bill to affect the legal rights of parties.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, if the hon. and learned Member for Youghal (Mr. C. Anstey) would move a proviso on the bringing up the Report he would give it his consideration.
Clause agreed to; as were the remaining Clauses.
House resumed.
The House adjourned at half after seven o'clock till Monday next.

MINUTES.
Sat first.—The Marquess of Bath, after the Death of his Grandfather.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Commons Inclosure; Law of Wills Amendment.

THE POLICY OF THE NEW GOVERNMENT—A DUTY ON CORN.
LORD BEAUMONTgave notice that, on Monday next, he should present a petition to their Lordships, complaining of the injury which the petitioners suffered in consequence of their uncertainty as to the intentions of Her Majesty's Government with regard to the importation of foreign corn; and, in presenting that petition, he should avail himself of the opportunity to ask the noble Earl at the head of the Administration, whether or not it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to recommend to Parliament any alteration in the present policy with reference to the importation of foreign corn as soon as the opinion of the country could be taken, and another Parliament assembled?
The EARL of ESSEXwould venture to detain their Lordships a few moments, while he expressed his regret that indisposition on the evening when the noble Earl at the head of Her Majesty's Government stated his views and intentions to the House prevented him from then saying how cordially he agreed with what fell from the noble Earl near him (the Earl of Aberdeen), when he declared in so frank and straightforward a manner how entirely unchanged were his opinions in regard to the commercial policy transmitted to us by that great and eminent man Sir Robert Peel. The noble Earl, on that occasion, expressed his belief, that few or none of those who then followed the standard of the right hon. Baronet had since changed their opinions on that subject. He (Lord Essex), for himself, at least, could truly aver that such was the case—that the opinions he had at that time deliberately adopted, he had not since seen reason to

941
repent of or to recall. On the contrary, with the noble Earl, he believed many benefits had arisen from the adoption of that policy—many as regarded agriculture, many more as regarded the country at large. And, although be frankly admitted that those benefits had not been unaccompanied by much distress and anxiety, yet he believed that had arisen, not so much from those measures themselves, as from the not unnatural alarm and uncertainty dependent on such a great and extensive change; and also from other causes, which he would not then detain the House by dwelling upon. In regard to all general questions he would most gladly give his humble and most disinterested support to Her Majesty's Government, as he would to any Government be it Whig or Tory, whenever he felt he could do so with perfect and entire satisfaction to himself. When he could not do so, he should, as he had hitherto done, as freely withhold it. Most gladly would be give it to a Government in any measures they might bring forward for the relief of the agricultural interest, by removing from them or alleviating any of those burdens which might be proved to press unduly or exclusively on them. Most firmly, most constantly, would he oppose them, should they endeavour (which he prayed Heaven they might not) to reimpose any duties on corn, now or at any future time, be they great or small, whether under the name of revenue, or under that of protection. The time was, he believed, when a small fixed duty, had it been accepted, would have been beneficial to all parties, and scarcely injurious to any. That time he thought was in retrievably past, and any such attempt now, I by keeping men's minds in a disturbed and unsettled state, could only tend to mischief, and to neutralise or indefinitely to postpone the full measure of those benefits which he conscientiously believed bad arisen, and would continue to arise, from the adoption of a liberal commercial policy and the abolition of the corn laws.

LAW REFORM.
LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, he wished to call the attention of their Lordships to various important measures connected with the reform of the law, then pending in the other House of Parliament. He was induced to take this step partly by a report which had gone abroad of what bad passed at a certain gathering which had occurred yesterday, and partly, also, by a report of
942
what had passed at a congregation of certain agitators—he used that term because they assumed it themselves—assembled I for the purpose of endeavouring, by the influence of large numbers, and by the parade of pecuniary subscriptions, to enforce, if possible, the speedy termination of the existing Parliament. Now, it was evident that if this Parliament should terminate in April, it would be impossible for the future Parliament to reassemble for serious business till the close of June or the commencement of July, and, in that case, all those measures for the reform of the law to which be had referred, or, at least, the greater part of them, must be inevitably postponed to another Session. Such a result would be considered by the nation at large as a great misfortune. And, first, with regard to the private business before Parliament, it happened that it was much heavier this year than on any former occasion. Already 250 Bills of a private nature were before Parliament. Their Lordships were not to consider that those Bills merely related to private individuals. Some of them applied to local districts of considerable extent—others to local societies or associations, involving pecuniary interests to an enormous extent. I He, therefore, left it to their Lordships to consider the great mischief and inconvenience which would accrue from postponing measures of this description to another Parliament, and the great delay and expense which would be occasioned in consequence. He passed, however, over this as a matter, comparatively speaking, of little importance. He would request the attention of their Lordships to public measures of the deepest importance; and, first, as to that most important measure for the reform of the Court of Chancery on the footing recommended in the report of the recent Commission. Their Lordships were aware that the public looked to that measure with eager and intense interest. Now, the Bill for carrying that measure into effect was at that moment in progress of preparation under the auspices of his noble and learned Friend on the wooksack, who was in every way so well qualified to insure success for it; and he (Lord Lyndhurst) was convinced that if no abridgment of the usual length of the Session took place, it would come into operation as law before the close of it. But if the Session should lie curtailed, and if Parliament should be dissolved in April, then, from the multiplicity of details incident to such a mea-

943
sure, it would be impossible to procure its being passed now, and it would of necessity be postponed to another year. He could not conceive any greater disappointment of the public mind; it would naturally be considered as a great public misfortune. There was another measure of scarcely inferior importance at that moment in the House; he meant the Bill for the Amendment of Procedure in the Superior Courts of Common Law at Westminster. Their Lordships were no doubt aware that a considerable transfer of business from the Superior to the County Courts had recently taken place. They must also be aware, if they reflected on the subject, as he knew that they had done, that the establishment of sixty independent tribunals must give rise, and had given rise, to many conflicts of opinion, and to much uncertainty of decision. The object of the Bill to which he had just referred was to simplify the proceedings of the Superior Courts, and to render them less expensive, in order that they might serve as models and guides to the inferior courts. A perfect judicature had two objects in view; not only the administration of justice in the causes brought before it, but also the laying down of certain rules to regulate transactions between man and man, and to avoid the evils of expensive litigation. A third measure of great importance was a measure which had passed through the House of Commons in the last Session—he meant the Charitable Trusts Bill. Throughout the country, in every portion of it, there existed a number of small charities, involving property to an immense amount, but individually they were so small as not to be worth pursuing in any court of justice. It had been considered important to establish a cheap tribunal to remedy the abuses to which such small charities had been found liable. The Bill to which he referred was introduced on the report of a Commission appointed by the Crown, and was well calculated to rectify those abuses—a Bill called for by all classes of Her Majesty's subjects, and now in such a state as would enable it to become in a few months the law of the land. There was also another measure of importance to which he must advert, as involving the interests of a numerous class of persons—as, for instance, all parties connected with machinery, with civil engineering, and, indeed, with science in all its branches—he meant the Bill for improving the law regarding Patents for
944
Inventions. Their Lordships were doubtless aware that the present mode of deciding on and of granting these patents was open to various objections—it was ineffectual—it was attended with enormous expense—and it checked the very object for which it was established. For the purpose of remedying these evils, a Bill had been introduced into that House, but had been lost in the other House of Parliament last Session, owing to the lateness of the period at which it arrived there. His noble and learned Friend on the opposite benches (Lord Brougham) had introduced a corresponding Bill into their Lordships' House that Session, It had been read a first time already; but no other proceedings had yet been taken upon it. The Vice-President of the Board of Trade of the late Government (the Earl of Granville) had promised on a late occasion to lay another Bill for the same object on the table; but that promise had not yet been performed. It was of great importance to all the classes whom he had just mentioned that a measure of that kind should become the law of the land as soon as possible. From the very nature and character of the Bill it could not become so, if any interruption was given to the Session by a dissolution; whereas, if no such interruption took place, it would be very easy to make it law before their Lordships separated. Then there was the Registration Act. That Bill would take the usual course if a dissolution were not forced on by proceedings out of doors. There was also another most important measure, which he could not leave out of consideration at presents—he meant the system for the military defence of the country. A most important consideration indeed this was. Every one admitted that the present state of our military defences was defective. The present system was not sufficient to protect us from insult or invasion; it was not sufficient to support the authority and influence of the country with foreign States. It was, therefore, necessary, for the honour and dignity of the country, that a remedy should be applied to its defects as speedily as possible. The late Government had indeed introduced a Bill to accomplish that object; but, somehow or other, that Bill had been the ostensible cause of its retirement from office. He conceived it to be impossible for any man who felt for the honour and dignity of the country to press for the dissolution of Parliament without having that

945
question settled. Now, such a measure could not be passed without legislation; and he must state that any man who, under such circumstances, should force the Government to a dissolution would be guilty of weakness, folly, and indifference to the public security, such as, he was sure, would never meet the approbation of their Lordships. The law measures to which he had previously referred were merely samples of the reforms which were now in contemplation; but there were other questions behind them of much importance. There were the questions of sanitary reform, of water supply to the metropolis, of extramural interment, of the registration of assurances. There was also a Bill in the House of Commons for the further relief of suitors in the Court of Chancery. All these measures would be lost or postponed to another Session, if this Session were to be curtailed in April. I He must also refer to another circumstance of no mean importance, namely, the administration of justice in their Lordships' House. There were a vast number of appeals now standing for judgment Their Lordships had already sat many weeks, and had made but very little impression on the list. If two months were now unexpectedly taken out of the midst of the Session, these appeals must stand over till another year. He left their Lordships to judge of the anxiety and distress which would thus be occasioned to suitors, and of the delay and expense which would be their inevitable result. The principles of the constitution provided that as little delay as possible should occur in the administration of justice. He, therefore, called upon their Lordships to treat these circumstances with the consideration which they deserved. There was one circumstance which affected this metropolis, and this metropolis alone, which ought not to be left entirely out of view while speaking on this subject. The tradesmen of the metropolis did not like a dull season and an unproductive harvest. In the course of last year there was the Great Exhibition; but the harvest which they reaped from it was not an abundant one. If you stopped the Session now, before it had reached its middle term, you would add greatly to their loss, and would throw a great pressure on a very respectable and valuable class of men. The combination of all these facts pressed heavily on his mind, and he must say that a dissolution of Parliament under such circumstances
946
would, in his opinion, be a great national calamity. If any man from personal feelings, or factious motives, or party or political interests, should press forward such a dissolution, he was quite sure that he would excite the indignation and resentment of all sober-minded and intelligent members of the community. His Lordship then moved for a return of the number of Private Bills then pending in the House of Lords.
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he rose to state the intentions of Her Majesty's Government with respect to the various measures for a reform in the law which had been recently brought under the notice of Parliament. He believed there never was a time when a man who had reform of the law at heart had a better opportunity than the present for carrying his views into effect. It was not only that the cause of law reform was supported by the general opinion out of doors, and by the nation at large, but even within the Parliament on this subject there was no division of parties. Her Majesty's late Government, and the law advisers of that Government, were quite as anxious and ready as he could presume to be in endeavouring to carry into effect measures for a reform of the law; and he felt confident that as he had been at all times ready to give his humble assistance towards carrying any legal measure that would tend to advance the public good, he should now have as full a measure of support as he himself had been at any time ready to render to others. But in bringing forward the measures to which he was about to refer, he wished most carefully to guard himself from the imputation that he was taking credit to himself for those measures. Those measures really emanated from the recommendations of the several Law Commissions—commissions which had been wisely sent forth, and wisely executed by learned men in whom the confidence of the country had been justly reposed; and these recommendations had been to a considerable extent matured by the subsequent consideration of noble and learned Friends. So far, therefore, though the Government was ready to adopt those measures, they could not take credit for originating them; but assuredly this credit he might take for the Government, that he believed no set of men ever existed who were more warmly disposed to facilitate, or more anxious to carry into execution, measures for a reform not only of our judicial institutions

947
and proceedings, but of the laws which affected property, and which in affecting property affected the happiness and the home of every man. One measure to which he would refer, was called the Suitors in Chancery Relief Bill. That was a Bill which was now in the House of Commons. It greatly curtailed the number of officers usually in attendance on the Lord Chancellor; it lowered the salaries of those officers who remained; arid it ratified the determination of the late Government to diminish by one third the amount of the salary paid to the Lord Chancellor himself. That Bill was not yet before their Lordships, and he should be sorry to bind himself to every letter of its provisions; but he readily bound himself to every portion of it that affected him (the Lord Chancellor) either personally, or in reference to any office to which he had the appointment. He had not appointed, nor did he intend to appoint, to any office which it was proposed to abolish by that Bill; and as to those offices which were retained, he should adhere to the precise scale of allowances which was laid down in that Bill, as much as if it were already the law of the land. As regarded the Lord Chancellor, he would make one observation. He had stated to their Lordships the reduction which had taken place in the Chancellor's salary. To that he made not the slightest objection; but he hoped that not only he himself, but his successors, might have the moral courage not to attempt to surround themselves with the state and circumstance which had been deemed becoming their office under different arrangements, but would accommodate themselves to the altered position in which they were placed by Parliament. There was one other circumstance regarding the Chancellor and his judicial labours to which he would advert. It was supposed that, because the Lords Justices had been appointed, the Lord Chancellor had now so much time that there was no longer any pressure upon him. The appointment of the Lords Justices had indeed removed from the Lord Chancellor one pressure—a most painful pressure—which every man in such a position must feel who devoted himself to the discharge of his duty ardently and sincerely. It was, that of sitting in the House of Lords upon appeals, and knowing that the suitors in Chancery were neglected—or of sitting in that Court, and knowing that the suitors at their Lordships' bar were neglected, and that their cases could not be
948
heard. The Chancellor of the present day would not have that painful feeling to struggle with, because he knew that whilst he was sitting in their Lordships' House, the business of his own particular court was being conducted by able and enlightened Judges to the satisfaction of the suitors. But it should be known that the Chancellor was not relieved from the arduous duties and responsibilities which were still incident to his office, in the discharge of which he must always find his time fully occupied six days in the week, "from morn till noon, from noon till dewy eve." He did not therefore know that the Chancellor had by this measure obtained any personal relief from labour. He would now call their Lordships' attention shortly to a Bill which had been mentioned by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst); that for the amendment of Procedure in the Courts of Common Law, brought into the House by his noble and learned predecessor. That Bill was without doubt a Bill of the utmost importance, and so far from any impediment being thrown in the way of it, it was now before a Committee of their Lordships' House; and the noble and learned Lords who were upon that Committee had but one object in view, and that was to adapt it to the public good, and to make it consistent with the report of the Commissioners. In reference to that Bill there was no difference of opinion, except such as would of necessity arise on the details of all large and important measures. There was another and most important measure to which the attention of the country was directed, and wisely directed—he meant the Bill for improving the jurisdiction and procedure of the Court of Chancery. That was indeed a measure of very great importance, and had long been justly called for by the country. The whole subject was referred by the Crown to a body of very able and learned Commissioners, who had made an elaborate and excellent report upon it; and he (the Lord Chancellor) had understood that a Bill had been prepared in pursuance of their recommendations. He found, however, no trace of such a Bill, but that the work yet remained to be done. He had received within the last two or three days a sketch of the heads of so much of the proposed Bill as related to the Masters' Offices. He should feel it his duty to introduce such a Bill, or, if the details required it, more than one Bill into their Lordships' House, and to take charge

949
of and endeavour to carry it or them into execution as speedily as possible. A long course of practice had made him well acquainted with this subject, and he should willingly fall in with the stream, which was now leading them, he hoped, to a safe conclusion. The great object was to dispose of the Masters' Office. The Masters' Office had never given satisfaction. This was owing partly to the nature of its jurisdiction; and partly to the fact that the Masters wanted this great power, namely, the power to compel parties to proceed with their matters without delay. Hence arose extensive and unnecessary loss of time, for which the suitors themselves were really responsible, though the blame was charged upon the Masters' Office. The great proposal of the Commissioners was the abolition of the Masters' Office; and those who understood the subject knew that the difficulty was not in abolishing the Masters' Office, but in providing a substitute for it. The proposition absolutely was—and he had never objected to it—to abolish the Masters' Office. He believed that the abolition of the Masters' Office was at the root of all reform; but in abolishing the Masters' Office it would be necessary to consider how and in what manner it should be effected. In the sketch that had been furnished to him, it had been proposed that after a certain day to be named in the Act, the Masters should cease to exercise their functions and should retire on their full salaries. That was a matter which required great consideration; and as at present advised, he thought it was his duty to make such use of the Masters themselves as would tend to the better administration of justice as long as they received their salaries. How then was this to be done? The Masters were men of high character, and performed high judicial functions; and nothing would be more unjust and nothing more repugnant to the feelings of Her Majesty's Government than to do any act which would have the effect of lowering or degrading their dignity in the administration of justice, or of placing them in a lower range of office. He would be no party to a measure of that sort. But the Masters, or a sufficient number of them, ought to remain till the matters now before them should be disposed of. If the new system was to work well, it was absolutely necessary that the Judges should begin upon an entirely new foundation; if otherwise the system would fail. They must not have an accumulation
950
of arrears to get rid of. They must have fair play and a fair start. The Masters, therefore, must be left, or a sufficient number of them, to dispose of the business now before them. There was a number of matters now in the Masters' Offices under the Winding-up Acts. The Masters had original jurisdiction in those matters, which occupied much time. There was no other tribunal by which the business could be executed, and they must he left to complete it. He was not certain, without further consideration, whether there were not other important duties which no Master would feel himself degraded in executing if still required to do so. Whilst the present scheme was in its infancy there might be a sufficient number of Masters left in office to superintend cases of receivership, the management of estates, and other matters of great importance which had always been within the province of the Master. Those were matters on which be would for the present reserve his opinion, for they required great consideration. But it was to be distinctly understood, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, that Masters were to be abolished; that no vacancy was to be filled up—[Lord BROUGHAM: And no new references,] That could not be avoided, for they were to finish the matters which they had now partially executed: but no references would be made to any Master in any new matter of which a Judge of the Court takes cognisance. But it would be impossible to be working two different systems of procedure at once. We could not say to one man. whose suit is already in Court, "You shall have interrogatories—you shall go before the Master;" and then say to a man who files his bill to-morrow, "You shall have no delay in your way, but shall get to your journey's end by the speediest road possible." He proposed, therefore, immediately after the Judges commenced their operation in chamber to abolish at once the whole course of proceedings now used in the Masters' Office, and that the Master should adopt the same rules as would govern the Judge in chamber. Then the question was, what was the new system to be adopted. Their Lordships were aware that by the present constitution of the Court of Chancery, the Judge transacted no business in chamber. He sat in Court, heard the cases, and gave his judgment; and it was necessary, for the due administration of justice, that the judgment should follow as speedily as might be upon the

951
hearing. Judgments long delayed made the heart sick. If a Judge sat fire hours in a day hearing cases, and gave his whole mind to the arguments of counsel, he would venture to say, that no man's physical powers were more than sufficient to answer the exigency, and to prepare and deliver his judgments thereon. The proposal was, that the Judge, who does not now go into chamber, should follow his own business into chamber; that he should have two chief clerks to assist him; that he should, if he might use the expression, become his own Master, and sit in chamber to dispose of that portion of the business which had hitherto been transacted by the Master in chamber. This, no doubt, would lead to difficulty, because, unlike the similar sittings of one Judge at Law, when the Equity Judge was in chamber his Court would be closed. He could not well approve of a proposition contained in the sketch that had been furnished to him, by which it was suggested that the Judges' clerks should have the same powers as Masters in Ordinary: that he thought was objectionable. It was proposed that they should transact the business in the present Masters' Offices, until other offices were procured; and he confessed that he saw the likelihood of bad consequences arising from that. The consequence would be that those clerks would be sitting in Southampton Buildings without any control or check; and the objections which applied to the peculiar position of the Masters' Offices would be found to attach themselves in a still greater degree to those persons who, although of a lower grade, would affect to be Masters. They would be likely to assume the same powers, and to feel an independence which was inconsistent with what he understood to be the object of the new regulation. He objected to expose them to the influence of the atmosphere of Southampton Buildings. He doubted whether the new scheme could efficiently work, unless each Judge could have attached to his court sufficient rooms, whereby he could have his superior officers under his own eye in the room next his own, and their clerks in the room next to theirs. What he understood of the new scheme was, that the Judge should not be absolved from taking care in pronouncing the decree that the minutes were properly prepared, and pointing exactly to the inquiries to be made and the accounts to be taken, and the like; and when that was done that
952
he would go into his own chamber and direct his own chief clerk how to take the account, for example, and would assist him if during the argument any question of difficulty was raised. Suppose, for instance, in a question of heirship the chief clerk felt any pressure, he should, instead of referring it to the Judge, by making a report upon it, call the attention of the Judge to the point, and tell him what he thought. They then would talk the matter over, and the clerk would have the knowledge of the Judge to assist him, which the Master has not now. That was the way the business ought to be transacted. If the Offices were thus put on a satisfactory footing, there was every reason to hope that the scheme would work; but there should be this golden rule with regard to the working of the plan, that nothing should be heard in chamber that could be heard in Court. The present Vice-Chancellors and the Master of the Rolls, who had dedicated so much time with so much ability to the consideration of the question, were perfectly willing, for the first time since a Judge in Equity had been created, to devote their time in the manner pointed out, so as to transact not only the business in Court, but the business in chamber. He (the Lord Chancellor) hoped and trusted that this union of characters would not be found to lower the judicial character of the Judge; it was difficult, however, to find united in the same man the power of administration, if he might so call it, and the judicial powers that were necessary for the discharge of the duties that were to be performed in open Court. The man who succeeded in one department might fail in the other; but he trusted that this union of powers, by the exercise of great diligence, would bring them to a happy result. The Commissioners had made proposals on other branches of the subject which had not yet been worked out upon paper—they had made several proposals of the utmost importance, and did that which the Americans, with all their enterprise, had failed to do; they provided against unnecessary parties to suits, which led to more expense and delay than any other proceedings. The anxiety of Courts of Equity to do complete justice in every case, and to prevent the possibility of fraud, had led to the evils of which we now complain. In order to protect particular persons, and to impose additional restraints upon others, they put them to expense which turned out perhaps to be

953
in that particular case utterly useless. It was impossible to deny, that in relaxing the system hitherto in operation, in forming a new code, and proceeding in the summary manner they proposed to do, with a new sort of evidence, it might and would open the courts to certain cases of fraud—cases which the greatest diligence could not guard against; but unwilling as he should be to allow a single case of fraud to take place, yet in the general regulation of human affairs they must have rules applicable to the generality of cases, and they could no longer, in order to guard one man against a possible fraud, expose all men to great expense and delay. The next point to which he wished to call their Lordships' attention was one of the deepest importance. The mode of examining witnesses in the Court of Chancery was by written interrogatories. The officer was called an Examiner, and before this Examiner the witnesses attended; they were asked different questions by him from the written interrogatories, and he took down their statements. It was a slow and expensive process, and it was not a satisfactory process; and what was fatal in such an examination was, that they never could effectually cross-examine the witness. As the opposite party could not know what the witness had said, they dare not attempt to cross-examine him, for by so doing they might damage their case instead of serving it. The mode of examination was unsatisfactory and expensive, and unfortunately was open to another imputation—that though it did not tend to perjury, it did not lead directly to truth. He understood it had become the practice in some quarters to give the witness his answers ready written, to enable him to deliver his answers to the Examiner. It was now proposed, and, though not without hesitation and some misgiving, he was prepared to accede to the, proposition—that written interrogatories should be abolished. We were now invited to imitate the example of the United States, which was represented to us as being the most perfect system of law, the two courts of Equity and Law being blended together. The Americans had abolished their Masters, as we proposed to do; they had abolished the mode of examination and the examiners, as was also proposed to be done by us. But the Americans had not done what was further proposed to be done in this country, namely, for written interrogatories and answers, to substitute
954
written affidavits. In the United States they had very nearly discarded affidavits—they gave no credit to affidavits—and except on a few motions they would not permit affidavits to be used; but in every common case of specific performance, for example, there was a jury sworn, and professional men and others were brought from their homes, and without any remuneration beyond a common mileage had to remain in attendance on the Court, and give their evidence. In this country it was proposed to use affidavits; and if the proposition was adopted it would be his earnest desire by every means in his power to prevent the mischiefs that otherwise would inevitably grow up from depending upon affidavits only. If interrogatories were dangerous on the grounds he had stated, it would be seen how dangerous affidavits might also be, when it was known that every affidavit was prepared by the attorney; the language was his language; he put forward the case and the points which he thought desirable, and the suitor in many cases necessarily swore to what he did not and could not know the effect of. There was also this feature in affidavits—that there never was any issue arrived at. To have an issue, was the great object of pleading and of the examination of witnesses. If their Lordships had two parties disputing before them in a common matter, they would find in all probability that neither of them understood the point in dispute; and when they had brought them to an understanding of the real point in dispute, it was very probable it would turn out that there was no dispute at all. Nothing was more difficult than to make men understand the real point for discussion in the dispute between them; and the proper object of a court of law was to bring that question to a clear issue, so that each party might understand it. It was often very difficult to do that. It would be more difficult if affidavits were to be used, and great expense must be incurred in order to get at the facts. We had formerly great experience of affidavits in Bankruptcy. The business in Bankruptcy in former times had been wholly conducted by affidavits; he had never seen larger briefs nor any from which it was more difficult to ascertain the point at issue, and yet it was this very system of using affidavits which was now sought to be established. In abolishing the Masters, it was worth while to see how that matter of the mode of taking evidence had been

955
dealt with in America. The public in this country were led to believe that in the United States legal institutions are perfect, and that we have nothing to do but to imitate them. Now they had abolished the Masters in America; the Courts referred everything; and who did their Lordships think was the person who now sat constantly every hour of every day, to whom were referred all accounts and all questions of fact and of difficulty—and who was chosen above all others in those cases to act as referee, and to do the business of the old Master?—The old Master himself! He (the Lord Chancellor) had no objection to allow a reference on a scientific question to a scientific person—to an accountant, or to an engineer; but he wholly objected to a court of justice delegating to another its own duties; and in America, in case of a reference, the referee was in fact the judge in the matter. In our own well-conducted courts of justice, if a long case came into a Court of Equity, it was heard patiently and decided by the Judge; but if a long case came on in an American Court, the Judge was compelled to refer to another individual what he ought to have heard himself; and the suitor was driven by the force of circumstances, however unwilling he might be, to consent to his cause being referred, which he had a right to have heard and decided by the Court itself. Nothing could be more injurious to the public interests, and damaging to suitors, than such references. And this happened even in our own Courts of Law at nisi prius. It appeared from a statement made by Mr. D. Field—a gentleman possessed of considerable information on the subject—that when they began to reform the Court of Chancery in the United States, there were between 3,000 and 4,000 cases waiting to be heard, and that judgment was seldom delivered in any case until two or three years after the case had been heard. When Mr. Field was asked what the consequence would be under their new system in a long case of complicated accounts, he stated that no law could provide for that—in case there were 1,000 items, and that each was to be proved and disproved by fourteen or fifteen witnesses, it might occupy 1,000 days. It was not therefore to be supposed that intricate matters could be speedily disposed of even in America. It was desirable that they should facilitate every step in the proceedings in a Court of Equity. One of the first things which it
956
appeared to him necessary to do, was to abolish or rescind all the present Orders of the Court of Chancery. These Orders, framed at different times by his noble and learned predecessors, though most excellent in themselves, had followed each other until the system had involved much difficulty. The best plan, he believed, would be to wholly rescind every one of the existing Orders, and to frame from them an uniform set of rules, adopting and retaining those which had worked best. If he were to go more into detail, he feared he should weary their Lordships; but holding the position he did, he had felt it necessary to make the statement which he had addressed to them, it being the wish of Her Majesty's Government that their Lordships should be early informed what their intentions generally were with regard to the several measures which had been contemplated. The measure to which he had referred with respect to the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery was not yet prepared; but when prepared it would be laid before their Lordships' House. The Chancery Commissioners had said at the end of their Report that the adoption of the new system might render it necessary to appoint new Vice-Chancellors. There was no step he should deprecate more; and he thought such an appointment should not be made unless there was an absolute necessity for it. They could not have an additional Judge without an additional Bar, and either the Bars would be too numerous, or, if not, and the Bar were to go from one Court to another, nothing could be more injurious to the administration of justice. Besides, if there were new Courts and the new measure were in operation, the clerks of the Judges in their chamber could not transact their business without the presence of solicitors. The more they accumulated Courts, the more business in Court would be thrown on solicitors, and they would be rendered less able to attend to the business in chamber. It was scarcely necessary for him to add another word, except to express his sincere desire to assist, with all the energy and ability he possessed, in making such amendments as would be of utility. He begged leave further to say that he had never neglected, at the expense either of time or of exertion, to improve any portion of the law that appeared to require amendment. There was a subject that required early attention, and to which he had lately called attention, namely,

957
the necessity for reforming the law with regard to testamentary dispositions. The law with regard to those documents stood thus: they were formerly required to be signed by the testator in the presence of a certain number of witnesses; but it was held that if a man wrote his own will, and described himself at the beginning, suppose as "Edward So and so," and then proceeded with his will, that was equal to a signature at the foot of the document. From that decision no evil ever arose; but it was thought to be an anomaly that when it was intended that the name should be signed at the foot, it should he sufficient to write the name at the beginning. It was therefore required by the Wills Act passed in the first year of the Queen, that every will should be signed by the testator at the foot or end thereof, and attested by two witnesses. By the simple words "at the foot or end thereof," hundreds, nay, perhaps, thousands of wills, without a single flaw on the face of them, had been held to be void. Hundreds of such cases had occurred that never met the public eye, because the wills were thrown aside as valueless. It was decided that at the foot or end meant immediately at the foot or end, and therefore if the testator's name were appended at any distance from the end of his disposition, it made the document void. Anything more calculated to disturb the ideas of people as to the justice of the law could not be. He would give their Lordships an instance of what had been decided, in reference to the will of a son of the late Vice-Chancellor of England. He was a barrister, and was so anxious about his will, that he executed four parts of it. He wrote the will upon a common sheet of note paper down to the bottom of the first page, and filled it. He then continued to write the will on the second page, and ended the second page by appointing his executors. There was rather more than an inch of space left between that and the bottom edge; he then went to the third page and wrote "Signed by me, &c." in the presence of the witnesses. He next placed his name immediately under that statement, and there was what is called the attestation clause, that is, the clause in which the witnesses state what was done in their presence, and the witnesses put their names to the attestation clause. Yet that will was, notwithstanding, declared to be void. That was
958
the state of the law regarding those documents, and the reform of that law was a subject that required the early attention of their Lordships. He should, therefore, lay upon the table of their Lordships' House a Bill to correct the law in this respect; and he could, in conclusion, assure their Lordships, that whenever he found a law of property operating injuriously to the community, he would use his best endeavours to correct the evil. He had ever kept a vigilant eye on the operation of our laws of property, and he begged to assure their Lordships that he should continue to do so.
LORD BROUGHAMcould not delay one moment to express the great and hearty gratification which he felt at hearing the declaration of his noble and learned Friend, that he and the Government intended to adopt entirely the recommendations of the Chancery Commissioners, and to lend his own powerful assistance—for powerful and invaluable it must be—to carry into effect those most important recommendations. As to the particular details of the mode and manner in which the plan was to be executed, he (Lord Brougham) should not enter at all at present, not even for a moment; but he was rejoiced to hear the avowal of his noble and learned Friend that he was entirely of opinion that the plan of the Commissioners should, in substance, be carried honestly and entirely into full and effectual operation. He (Lord Brougham) might express some doubts upon one or more points in the beginning of the speech of his noble and learned Friend, as to the manner in which the change was to be made in the Masters'; Office, and with regard to the examination of witnesses; but he would defer giving his opinion until they saw the Bill. He thought his noble and learned Friend had not exactly stated the effect of the recommendation of the Commissioners, in regard to affidavits: it was not to substitute affidavits for interrogatories generally, but only in uncontested matters; and in contested matters there should be as little of those interrogatories or affidavits as possible. If possible, the evidence should be taken by the same person who was to pronounce an opinion upon it. The principles were quite clear on this subject, unless in uncontested matters; and to save the needless expense of witnesses, all evidence should be by vivâ voce examination; and whenever it is possible, the Judge, who is to decide on

959
the evidence, should himself preside over the examination. He entirely agreed with his noble and learned Friend with respect to the great defect in the law in relation to testamentary matters, and he should heartily rejoice if he could provide a remedy for it. If they passed, the Bill or Bills that would be necessary to carry the recommendations of the Commissioners into effect, they would undoubtedly have accomplished a great amendment in the procedure of the Court of Chancery. He entirely agreed in the encomiums which his noble and learned Friend had passed on the Commission, which was excellently composed; and the able and learned men who gave their labour on that Commission had performed their duties with the greatest possible ability; and, in his (Lord Brougham's) opinion, with singular effect. They had acted with perfect impartiality and calmness, but at the same time with great firmness. He would also suggest that the Committee of their Lordships' House, by whom the subject was considered, was not without their share of credit. That Committee, over which he (Lord Brougham) presided, entered very largely into the matter, and received evidence of great importance, which they reported to their Lordships. There had been some difference of opinion amongst the witnesses examined. One of the Vice-Chancellors entertained great doubts with respect to the measure, which in truth is the main part of the Commissioners' Report, making the Judges work out their own causes, partly in court and partly in chamber, and with regard to abolishing the Masters' Offices; but on further inquiry that learned Judge had his doubt removed—had entirely agreed with his colleagues—and had signed the Report. If they succeeded in carrying the proposed measures through, and if the new system were brought speedily into operation, there would be an end of such abuses as he called the attention of their Lordships to last Session. They should no longer, in a cause for recovery of 500 l., have to pay—as a noble Friend of his, whom he did not then see in his place, had to pay—a bill of costs of 1,200 l. They should no longer hear of a case where a suit had been going on for eleven years for the mere distribution of a fund, costing the suitors those eleven years of anxiety and vexation, and 2,870 l. of money—of 270 l. being expended upon behalf of an infant, in order to obtain, from time to
960
time, an alimentary provision of not more than double that amount in the whole—of 2,000 l. expended, and ten years' delay to obtain payment in the whole of 1,000 l. out of a larger fund; of 90 l. being expended in order to obtain an order in the Masters' Office (even then subject to an appeal to the Court) for a repair of 10 l.; of 70,000 l. to 80,000 l. being expended for the cost of one suit, no doubt a very heavy one, involving a sum of 350,000 l., but of which this cost was no small proportion—the case lately stated by his noble and learned Friend near him (Lord Lyndhurst); nor of a litigation of five or six years when the whole matter in dispute was whether a party should pay 20 l. for scandal and impertinence, in accordance with an order of the Master, the cost being 800 l.; of which no doubt 750 l., the stated cost, would be paid by the party against whom the case was ultimately decided, but the remaining 50 l. would have to be paid by the unhappy winner, who was thus 30 l. worse than if he had sat down with the original loss of the 20 l. These things we shall no longer have, to inflict pain upon the parties, bring contempt on the jurisdiction, and hatred on the institution from which such fruits can spring. He trusted when this great improvement was effected, that their Lordships, and amongst them his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack, would have leisure and inclination to apply themselves to further amendment of the law; and that he should not incur, in urging this, the blame of a proverbial denunciation, metrically expressed, against unreasonable persons to whom something is granted, and who wish for much more. He must strongly, amongst other things, recommend to his noble Friend at the head of the Government, and to his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack, not to allow the interposition of any longer delay in the renewal for a very limited period—for a very few months, certainly not more than a year, if so much, was all that was necessary—of that Criminal Law Commission, the fruits of whose labours had hitherto been wholly unavailable to the country, after the expenditure of many thousand pounds, and the delay of many years, although they had reported most ably and learnedly upon our criminal law and criminal procedure. This delay ought not any longer to be allowed.
House adjourned to Monday next.