The Press. — London, England, 1853-06-04 00:00:00

100 Vrottebings in arlianunt. AFFAIIIS tit' TURKEY The Earl of liAnnwicxE, in inquiring, on Monday, of the Government whether any instructions had been sent out to Admiral Dundas to sail with the Mediterranean fleet to the Bosphorus, and, if so, on what day he was expeeted to depart from Malta, en tered into some computations which showed the im portance of hours in the present critical state of affairs in Turkey. Prince Menschikutf, according to the last intelligence, had finally broken off his cont . u t unications with t he Porte on the .22nd of May . . Counting up the days required by his courier, if des patched that same day, to reach St. Petersburg, for the consequent orders to be sent back to the Russian fleet at Sebastinopol, and for the transit of that fleet thence to !onstantmople, under average circumstances of wind and weather, the noble earl arrived at the result that the hostile force could make its appear ance otr the Golden Horn by the 12th of June. The English Government, having the use of telegraphic communications, might, on the other hand, have transmittatl orders on Saturday, when the news first arrived, which Admiral Pinatas could receive on the following Wednesday, and, with ordinary diligence and tact, bring his squadron on the scone of contest. by the 10th, or two days prior to the computed ar rival of the Russian forces. The Earl of Cl.,taKsoox remarked that the tines • Lion before hint amounted to this, whether any orders had been sent to Admiral Dandles to proceed from Malta to the Dardanelles. Now, he was quite sure, after what had occurred in the house only on the previous Friday night, when their lordships seamed concur in the propriety of her Majesty's Govern meat not giving any explanations on a matter in which they were imperfectly intOrmed,—he was sure Unit they would still more concur in the propriety of his declining altogether to state what orders had been Riven. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Disraeli, in the House of Commons, having made a similar inquiry, Lord Joas ltvssELL, in like manner, declined to give any information on the subject; adding, that, if notice of a formal motion should be duly given, the Government would hold itself ready to defend the course they might have taken. THE JUDUES' EXCLUSION BILL. This bill, which was introduced by Lord llotn.vm, declares the Master of the Rolls, and some other judicial functionaries, ineligible for seats in the House of Commons. It stood for a third reading on Wednesday, when Mr. H. DueumuND moved that the hill be read a third time that day six mouths. lie wished to see a greater infusion of learning and learned men in the house, instead of dispensing with what the y had, and would ' gladly enlarge the number of representatives granted to collegiate bodies, as well as grant repre sentation to the inns of court and other learned localities and institutions. Mr. 31A(•tmetv supported this amendment with pleasure and confidence. History taught us that successive Masters of the Rolls had held seats in that. house for six hundred years, and had recorded the names and the services of a multitude of distin guished men amongst them, but had left. no trace of a single injury or disadvantage sustained through their being members of Pa.liament. Nor was it pre tended that any one of them had discharged his judicial duties less efficiently in consequence. Thus far facts went.. As for arguments, they seemed wholly based upon the dictum of Lord Hallam, that nothing was so hateful as a politica l judge. "If," said Mr. Macaulay, "1 adopt. this principle of the noble lorJ,— " I must pr ttttt mop this hill the most wretelted and pitiable reform that Was ever produeetl—tlw most hotno•o -pail& dose that ever glutei: proposed for the widest-spread malady. I Hear, hear, hear.) For if he considers the nature of the political and jitdivial institutions of this country, he will Mal the political and judicial character so combined, so interwoven from the top to the bottom of our system, that the reform he proposes to make will lie only an infini tesimal change when compared with the system he proposes to amend. (Cheers.) It has been asked, with great justice, if the Master of the Rolls is to be excluded, why not the Recorder of London? L should lie extremely sorry to see the Recorder of London excluded from this house; but I must say that the reason for excluding him is ten times as swing as that for excluding the Master of the Rolls. But, to go still further. why not ell recorders, and all chairmen of quartersessions? I will venture to any that there arc reasons for excluding chairmen of quarter for excluding the Master of the Rolls. Yet Or fifty of these jukes to be members of assembly, but would exclude a judge whose such that, since the time of Edward 1., nei ,r any of his predecessors have been accused ealunnty, or have ever been suspected. of using • power for political ends. You turn them forsooth, you say you hate political:m.ll4es. - ' was even stronger than this. Ln ann . assembly, so far from declaring men judicial functions ineligible, there were vitations given to them, and seats accorded THE PRESS. to men merely because, in legal gradation, they had attained the rank of judges :—. "Is not the House of Lords a political assembly ? Aud is it not notoriously the fact that for several centuries judges have always had considerable sway, nay, that they have very often had a decided ascendancy in that house ? Is it net perfectly notorious that Lord Hardt% ickei—it great judge—long ruled that house?—that he bequeathed that power to another judge, Lord Mansfield; mid that when his energy eleeitycil the power petard to a third judge— Lord Thttrlow ? We many of us can remember how power ful u Is,iitical influence Lure! Eldon exercised in that house —how 1w made and unmade Ministries—with what vene ration, approaching to idolatry, he was regarded by one great party in this eountry—with what peculiar aversion by the other. When Lord Eldon's long domination ceases!, other great judges, both Whig and Tory, Were contending there. And yet this exciting and important arena the wade lord, who hates political judges. is perfectly willing to leave open to the Master of the Rolls. His objection is. not to the union of the political and judicial functions, but simply to the union of the judicial character with that of a member of the House 111 Commons. War.) The Master of the Relies may be—the noble lord has not the least objec tion to it—the soul of a great party—the head of it great party—the leader of a ilemocravy—the leader of an aristo emey—he may use all his powers of rhetoric and sophistry to inflame the passions and mislead the understandings of the senate : but it must not be in this room ; he must go a few I had feet from where we are assembled ;he must sit on a red bench and not on a green one; he must say my lords' and not ' Mr. Speaker; and then the noble lord is perfectly willing to allow him to form part of a political assembly. (( 'hemp.)" Even thus, proceeded Mr. Macaulay, he was un derstating the case. Not merely were there judges in that political assembly, the House of Lords, but every member of that house was de facto a judge. The supreme court of the country was a political assembly : " bi it. not perfectly clear that if the principle of the noble lord was sound he should begin, not with the Master of the Rolla, but with the House of Lords? For can any position be clearer than this, that it is more important that the court above should be constituted on right principles than the court below? If the Master of the Rolls goes wrong, the House of Lords may correct him ; but who is to correct the errors of the House of Lords? (Hear, hear.) The noble lord is perfectly content that their lordships shall, in the morning, sit as judges upon those questions on which depend the liberties and the property and the cha racter of every man amongst us, the Master of the Rolls amongst them ; and that then in the afternoon the same lords shall meet as politicians, shall attack each other sometimes pretty sharply, and shall debate the question of the Canadian clergy reserves, of Irish education, of the Government of India—and to all this the noble lord says he has no objection whatever. Here, then, you have it judicial system in which the exercise of political functions is combined with the judicature both above and below. If we pass this bill it will probably be taken to the House of Lords by men who have judicial functions, and will there be taken out of their hands by the Lord Chancellor, who is a Cabinet Minister, and at the same time the highest judge in the realm—end this mummery wecall ' purifying the administration of justice' (Cheers.)" As far as it went the bill tended to degrade the Commons' and exalt the Upper House. If the prin ciple were carried out consistently, every man who held place or function must be removed from the House of Commons, so that in the end the Lords would concentrate all there was of official re ponsi- Why or personal talent, would conduct the business of the country, and assist in the great conflicts of party, leaving the popular representatives to attend to turnpike roads and canal btlis. The measure was also supported upon the principle of the division of labour. Mr. Macaulay dissected that argument : " It is said that the duties of a Master of the Rolls us a judge are hardly compatible with the duties of a member of Parliament.; it is said he is paid by the public, and the public require his whole time ; it is said, let us enforce the division of labour, and let us not permit his time to be wasted on anything, but oblige him to devote it to that to which it more particularly belongs. If this be on argu ment, it is an argument for keeping judges out of the House of Lords, as well as out of the House of Commons ; but I deny it is useful for such purpose whatever. ( Hear, hear.) I say the principle of the division of labour is one of great value and importance, but one that may be most easily abused. You can carry it out in matters that are towel) , mechanical, but you may easily carry it too far when you come to higher operations. ( liter. hear.) I do not believe that Miehael Angelo would have been a greater painter if he had not been a sculptor ; or that Sir Isaac Newton would have been a greater philosopher if he had not been a mathematician. (Cheers.) Ido not believe that a man would be a greater lawgiver because he' was not a great judge; on the contrary, I think that between the ditties of a legislator and those of a judge there is as Anse a conniption as between anatomy and surgery. (('heers.) I will refer to an authority that the hononrable member for Meuntrose probably rates more highly than I do—Mr. Bentham. Of Mr. Bentham as a moralist or a inetaphyaieian alone I have no very high opinion; but I look upon him as one of the greatest writers on the judicial organisation that ever lived. (('heers.) I tind in his celebrated work on judicial organisation an article in which he dwells on the exceeding evil of plurality in oftle. : he strongly objects to suffering a judge to be anything but a judge, with one single exe...ption : A judge,' he says, ought to be permitted to se: , •epresentative assembly that legislates for the commonwealth. tlir the very best SATURDAY, school for a great legislator is the judicial bench.' (Hear, hear. )" Adverting to one other plea that had been set up in support of the measure, namely, that the process of election was accompanied with circumstances which no judge ought to encounter, as they soiled the judi cial ermine, Mr. Macaulay asked " Are we prepared to say that no person can conic into the House of Commons except by means that are incon sistent with the gravity and dignity of the judicial bench If so, it well becomes us to set our house in order. (Hear, hear.) How can any country long prosper. if that assembly on which all its dearest interests depend—which by a sin gle vote ciut change its government, and give a new direc tion to its whole policy, domestic, commercial, colonial, financial—can only be entered by means which must lower its charaeter? But it is not so. In what measure did Sir William Scott lower his character by coming into this house? In what way did Sir John Copeley lower his chit meter by coming into this house as a member for the Uni. versity of Cambridge ? But it is not necessary to speak of universities; it would be most unjust and unfair not to say that delicacy and liberality of aentimeut that would du honour to any university may be found among the 101. householders of a great city. (( lierrx.)" Alluding then to the inconveniences and absurdities which arose out of the existing disabilities of certain public functionaries, and even some Cabinet. Ministers, to hold seats in the Commons, and which he trusted would be removed by a new Reform Bill, Mr. Ma. caulay finally admitted that some exception must be taken to his doctrine, that judges were fit and proper persons for members of that house. He showed the reason why : " Any judge who is properly elected should be admitted into the house, except there is some plain reason why that judge should not conic in here. There is a reason, I ad mit, against the admission into this house of the fifteen judges ; because they are occasionally summoned by the House of Lords to assist them—they have a place in the House of Lords—and, if you mean that the House of Lords should continue to be the chief court of error, their sitting in it is absolutely necessary. (Hear, hear.) It would be impossible to continue the House of Lords as a great court of error unless they are assisted by the fifteen judges ; those judges have, consequently, seats in it, and there von must leave them, for it would be inconsistent with the privileges and dignity of this house to have any member who was at the beck aril call of the other house. The same rule applies to the Scotch judges, and the Irish judges are excluded for the obvious reason that they could not discharge their duty if elected in this country. But certainly I would leave the door of this house open to the Master of the Rolls ; I would throw the door open again to the Judge of the Admiralty, who was most absurdly ex cluded; I would suffer those eminent judges who are kept out of the house, not by any particular act, but merely b: the operation of the old act of Amie— the Lords Justices and the Vice-Chancellors—to sit in this house, if they could get constituent bodies to elect them. 1 am perfectly certain that in that way we should add to the credit of this great representative assembly—with the credit of which the credit of representative governments all over the world is intimately bound up—and render our own body far more efficient for the discharge of our duties. (Cheers.)" On a division the bill was thrown out by a majority of 221 to 123-101. ALTERATION OF OATHS BILL. The second reading of this measure, whose object he described to be " simply to strike out of the oaths which parties were required to take as qualifications for seats in Parliament, and for holding certain offices, such parts as were inoperative, idle, or absurd," was moved on Tuesday by Lord LYNDHURST, who dissected the language and meaning of the three oaths at present exacted, those, namely, of allegiance, supremacy, and abjuration, in order to show the effect of his proposed bill upon each of them. With the first he had no intention of meddling ; its import was obvious, and it embraced the whole duty of the subject towards the Sovereign. The second, the oath of supremacy, was eNitlentV directed solely against the Roman Catholics, and yet was required only from Protestants; it was passed at a time when the Catholic body had no social or po litical rights, and even hardly a recognised existence in England, and it was still maintained, though they were now, to all practical purpos es, on an equality with the Protestants. This oath, therefore, laboured under the double absurdity of being in force only as regarded those to whom it was never intended to apply, and of setting forth a declaration which was at the present moment untrue. It had been repealed with respect to the Catholics ; and its affirmation that the Pope had no spiritual authority in the realm could not cohere with the tolerance of the Catholic faith, which rested solely upon the Papal supremacy in spiritual affairs. He proposed, therefore, to abrogate this oath entirely. With regard to the oath of ab juration, lie urged that the extinction of the Stuart dynasty had rendered all the clauses in that oath relating to them, and abjuring their right and title. altogether vain and frivolous ; it was making an in deeent mockery of a solemn rite to continue to use them. those portions of the oath he proposed, therefore, to cancel, retaining only the sentences relating to the succession to the Crown, as fixed by the Act of Settlement. This he considered amply sufficient to secure the Protestantism of the t.kae- 1 111 110:0 - wr 7.1 , 7111 lunch stronger acasiotta than fi volt allow• forty this political t functions are th •1• he nor rit. 11 Ly cahut t l l •lr judicial Olt hccause, tO lint the case tit •r llolitirnl exercising. • jt special ita ' I