Star. — London, England, 1825-05-21 00:00:00

• PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. —ussets-- HOUSE OF LORDS. MAY 20. The Loan C.nancesa.oz the Earl of Soar:wirer, and Viscount Nes.vss.t.v., as his Majesty's Commissioners, brought down the Royal Assent to the Capital Convicts Bill, the Scotch Juries Bill, the Small Debts Bill, •the Metropolis Justices Bill, and a great number of Private Bills. Lord Ammon, and others, from the Commons, brought up the County Courts Bill, and the County Itat•be Mortgage Bill, which *ere read a first time. Earl SPENCER presented Petitions from Wellingborough, Northampton, and Rugby, in favour of the County Courts Bill. — Laid on the table. The Bankers' Bill went through a Committee, as well as the Chelsea Pensioners Bill. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE presented a Petition from the Belfast Literary Institution, relating to the state of the Funds of thatlfsociety. Referred to the Committee on the State of Ireland. On the motion of Viscount MaLvit.t.s, the Bill to regulate the, trial of Scotch Peers, was read a second time. The Noble Lord then presented a Petition from the Owners and Occupiers of Land in the County of Elgin, against any alteration oil the Corn 'AWL—Laid on the table. • Viscount MELV I LLE also presented another Petition from the I same parties, for some alteration and amendment of the Stamp Acts.—Read, and laid on the table.—Adjourned till Wednesday. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. LESLIE FOSTER moved that all the Committees now sitting have leave to bit notwithstanding any adjournment of the The same Honourable Member presented a Petition from-Dun daik, against tbt Liverpool Docks Dues Bill, praying that those dues Wright be reduced at least 50 per cent. and to be heard by Counsel. Ordered to he on the table. Milt DOCKS BILL. Sir G. CLERK moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Leith Docks Bin. Lot d A. HAMILTON said, that from the great im portance of this measure, and owing to the pecuniary interest involved in it, it required the most serious con sidersti Many of the inhabitants both of Edinburgh and Leith were oppo,ed to the Bill. For his own part, although he would not move for the rejection of the Bill, as he had not read the evidence connected with it, if such a motion were made he would support ie. The Port of Leith, which may be fairly regarded as the Port of Edinburgh, had been put up to sale and bought up by a Joint-Stock Company, and it happened that many of them were bbyers and sellers, being Members of the Corporation who sold, and also of the Company that purchased it. Such a sale, he would contend, was most improper and illegal.— Besides, there was a large debt upon the Dock. An action was now depending to decide this debt, amount ing to '265,0001. as contended for by one party, and de nied to be so much by the other. It was therefore most improper for the House of Commons to intet fere before that action was decided—(hear, hear). He hoped the Lord Ad vocate was a friend to the law of the land, although be was a friend to this Bill ; and he would undertake to say, that the Learned Lord would not say that the sale, under the circumstances 'seised stated, was a legal one. Though he had not read the evidence, he was suffi ciently acquainted with the facts to state that the naeasure was highly ohjectionabk. The LORD ADVOCATE protested against the un fait nesss of making him personally responsible for this Bill. It was mat his Bill; he had, with other Scotch Members, attended the evidence, and nierely moved the hill a private, not a patine Bill. The Noble Lord hid not read the evidence; he had nut attended the Committee; in short, be acknowledged he knew nothlng about it, except what he had beard from report- 7 -I..mi lISM 1 LTON explained. Mt. HUME raid he was instructed to oppose this Bill, and on the pat t of the whole community of Scot land he protested against its further progtess, as inju rious to the trade of Scotland by the imposition ofa new and heavy duty. He contended that the trustees had violated their trust by the sale of the dock to themselves, and he was satisfied that the Lord Chancellor would confirm that ()Onion. In tend of boirowirig the money they wanted at 4} per cent. they had secured to them. selves 6} j-er cent. for ever--(Cries of " No, No !"). Some persons had mid their Shares at a premium even of 15 per cent. The two principal grounds on which he would oppose the Bill were, first, because he was unwiring to conient to an imposi tion of a new ditty on the trade of any part of Scotland; and, se condly, because he thought it highly objectionable.whilst the amount of the debt was yet unascertained, and an action was depending to determine it. The proceeding had already caused much mischief, and he hoped that his Hon. Friend would take the sense of the House and give every opposition to it. Sir G. GLERK thought the charges brought against the Corpotation of Edinburgh by the two Hon. Mein hers very unfair and unjust, as neither of them had attended the Committee upon - the Bill. Some year; ago, the Corporation of Edinburgh had contracted a debt of 265,0001. fcr certain improvements of the Port of Leith. Flom the embarrassment in which the Cor poration was placed, they proposed the sale of the it interest in the docks to a joint stock company. It was not until the 9 . ,h of October that the Shares were taken tip. owing to the favourable state of the public funds. The merchants of Leith released themselves from an obligation into which they had eivered to take any of the shams, which qu ckly rose to a pentium of 13 per cent. The high rate of 6} per cent. was objected to as too high a rate of interest, but if that was the large,t amount of interest that could accrue to the Members of the Company, he thought it was not too much, considering the risk that attended the speculation. He denied that this measure was, as had been asierted, a Government measure, taken up by Government with a siew of overwhelming all opposition. It was unfair to have such a measure of general utility opposed by Hon. Members who had neither read the evidence, nor attended the Committee on the Bill. Mr. I. P. GRANT said the Bill did not rest upon the Committee, but upon the bread principles of law. The Magistrates, as Trustees of the port of Leith, sold the trust to themselves, and afterwards disposed of the shares at a premium of 15 per Cent. Such a proceed ing he was sure would be declated illegal in the Court of Chancery. The Trustees had taken the shares upon speenlation of an Act of Parliament, and by so doing brought themselves within the Bubble Act. The Corporation had sold the property without an advertisement. The community of Leith petitioned against the Bill, and every town on the Leith coast trading with that port had followed the example. He called upon the House, therefore, as it valued the law and the interest of the community of Leith, who dere unrepresented in that House, to reject this unjust measure. Mr. W. DUN DAS briefly supported the Bill. Lord GL E VOUCH Y protested against the manner in which those Scotch jobs were managed in the Committee up stairs, which Committee was principally composed of Scotchmen. Mr. ABERCROM BY :aid, the Bill was a most im portant one, and involved many interests. He objected to transferring the management of those Docics to an irresponsible party—to a Joint Sock Company, to per sons not having any ;:iterest in the concern; they had no interest but that of receiving their dividends. It was a floating changeable trade, oaring nothing for the trade of the Pert of Leith, and as little for the Docks, because their dividends were eneured to them. Captain WEMYSS said be bad attended the Committee; and lie most conscientiously believed it to be a most complete job. Mr. T. WILSON observed, that though he had not attended the Committee, he had heard quite sufficient to convince him that It was a job. The House then divided; the numbers were • For the Bin 14 • Against it 41 Majority against the Bill —27 Lord A. HAMILTON presented *P et i t i on f rom Glasgow, in - Rill—Ordered t , the table. _ • • •• - :0• „. A dmliar one keen thif i tOwn 01.14 of Ruthergien ; and a si 1 milar tine front dieenbils. ' - Sir R. FgftousoY presented a Petition from Dundee against the Dundee Intprovemmlite. BM; at least praying that it might be Purietill the seat %do* rish Mulinfactareral Mlilwas read a third time and passed. The Battle Bridge Roads.Rin vas read a third time and passed. A IFORetti PgTITION. Mr. V. FITZGERALD presented the Report of the Committee on the Forged Petition in favour of the Roman Catholic Bill, pre sented by Sir J. Newport, Marsh 17. It stated that Richard le Poer Trench Pilkingtoo had confessed himself to be the sole author and contriver of the Petition, and the forger of the names. Kr. Secretary PEEL moved that the said Pilkington bad been guilty of a Breach of Privilege.—Agreed to. He then moved that the said Pllkiogton be committed toNewgate. Mr. BROUGHAM wished the usual course to be pursued, that .the party be called to the bar. The SPEAKER replied, that' the usual coarse had not been Mich, except where there was a doubt. Mr. BROUGHA M was not aware that the individual had been called before the Committee. Mr. V. FITZ° ERA LU replied, thatPilkington had been called before the Committee, and had admitted the facts. Mr. BROUGHAM admitted that.the ttkani Well deserved to be sent to Newpte, but he did not like the Mode proposed ; the pre cedents adopted were not good ones tiS fallow. The more lenieqs- 4 course, and the one which was calculited to have the sanction df -I all parties, was to call the individual to the Bar. only, however, to hear whether he had anything to say in mitigation. Mr. B.INKES approved the course proixised by the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel); but, for the sake of unanimity, he would agree to the lion. and Learned Member's proposition. Mr. Secretary PEEL acceded to the Ilea. and Learned Gentle man's proposition. The individual was then ordered to be brought to the bar in the custody of the Strjeant at Arms. The Serjeant then went to take the individual into custody. Lord 'STANLEY presented a Petition front the Cotton Manu facturers of Manchester, against the Bin for regulating labour in Cot tun Factories. Mr. LESLIE FOSTER presented a Petition front the Solici tors and Attornies of Ireland, praying the repeal of their Annual License Duty. Mr. 11U 3IF. presented a Petition from Master Mariners and Seamen, stating, that the Seamen,' Hospital was insufficient, and that the deduction of sixpence a month from the wages of mer chant seamen, for the support of Greenwich Hospital, from which they received no benefit, should be repealed. Lot d A LTHORP inquired of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on what terms he would allow runt to be rectified? fhe CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the duty on British Spirits was ss. 10d. and he proposed that hum should pay a duty of Ts. Id. Mr. BROUGIIAM obtained leave to bring in a Bill for the _ _ establishment of a University in London. After some conver sation as to the day for bringing in the Bill,Thursday was appointed. JURIES RILL. Mr. Secretary PEEL moved, that an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, pray:ng that the regulations for impannelling Juries in local jurisdictions should be laid before the house. The Right Hon. Gentleman said, he found the information would be to.:essary, to enable hint to render the Juries' complete. .The motion was agreed to. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, the Bill before the li. , u,e consolidated 60 Acts of Parliament, by u hick Juries are at present regulated. Another object of the Bi:1 was to extend the number of those qualified to serve as Jurors, by including persons possessed of personal pro perty and leaseholders ; the latter having a lease for 20 years of 201. a year value, and the former being householders, and possessed of property to the amount of 4001. The main improvement was, that in every case in which the Crown was a party, all Special Juries should he selected by ballot—llear.) Mr. SCA ItLETT expressed his entire approba: ion c-f the measure. There was no subject of mote impottance than rendering the trial by Jury as perfect as possible. Mr. Secretary PEEL said the manner in which this measure was received was one of the greatest encour agements any public man OW receive in the discharge of his duty, Mr. DROUGHANI thought the Bill w °old intro.. duce a great improvement in the trial by Jury, parti cularly in the method of appointing Special Juries, which could not be always free from suspicion. The House resolved itself into a Committee on the BilL The several clauses were agreed to. The House resumed.—The Report was ordered to be received on Thursday next. JUDGES' SALARIES REPORT. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in moving that the Report of the Resolutions for in creasing the Judges' Salaries should be brought up, had one or two observations to make, arising out of the discussi in on this subject the other evening. The ques tion of the retired allowances to the Judges, he was, free to acknowledge, had not formed part of the plan which he originally submitted to the House; but, on reconsideration, he certainly was disposed to embrace in his object the retired allowances of the Puis , ie Judges, and he, then fore, had some m , ditication to propose of his former arrangement. In fixing the sa hales of die Puisne Judges at 6,000/. per annum, he had two objects in view —first, to hold out' an induce mint to younger men to accept of the office, and a:so to those of considerable prictice in the profession ; and secondly, he ir4d in view that point which the Ho. nottrabie and Learned Member opposite intendei to bring before the House to night, namely, the transla tion of the Judges from the lower to the higher sta tions on the Bench. He had no hesitation in saying, that the practice of promotion on the Bench was as improper as it was unconstitutional ; yet it would be very wrong, he thought, to say, that' in no ca , e ought the Government to resort to such a step. — Practically, therefore, he conc.ived that raising the salaries of the Judges would remove one obstacle in the way of a better course. With respect to the retired salaries, which were now fixed at 2:3001. a year, lie pro posed to add 5001. per annum to that sum, and to de duct so much from the 60001 a year he had previously mentioned. By this means while on the Bench, after allowing for the expenses of the Circuits, they would each have about 50001. per annum nett: but if less were offered, he should doubt whether the two objects he had m view would be attained ; and while they were lost for a trifling consideration, by fixing the scale too low, a subsequent revision bf the question might be come necessary, which, in his opinion, ought, if pos sible, to be avoided—(Hear, hear !)—lt was obvious, however, that what related to the retired allowances could not be embodied in the Report he now moved to be brought up, although he should, after it had been received, move the reduction of the Judges' salaries from £6OOO t0.f5500 per annum each—(Hear, hear). Mr. SCARLET!' wished the retired allowances to be augmented still more; nor, as above two persons at a time could not be expected to enjoy them, did he consider such an increase would be burthensome to t' e publ:c. A Judge in the receipt of 5,5001. per annum WAS accustomed to live in a certain style, which he would find it difficult to abandon for one to the main tenance of which 2,8001. a year was adequate. He therefore wished some inducement were held out to Judges to retire from the Bench while they could do so with dignity. To his own knowledge the late Baron Wood, whose infirmities rendered his administration of justice most painful to himself, to the Bar, and to the spectators in Court, hesitated two or three years when he wanted one eye, and he might add both his ears, be fore he could bring himself to retire. Nor was it his object that in retiring with dignity the Judges should become a useless to the country. Few, perhaps, were aware, that Ito the Privy Council lay all appeals from the Colones,' including the Indite's, and that - the decision was final. Ic was at the same time impOssible that Gentlemen, without experience and knowledge of the law, could properly determine some of the worst causes. He re collected some years ago, on one occasion, when Sir William Grant, who, from nature and education, as a Lawyer and a Judge_ was competent to any judi cial function—owing to some circumstance, did not attend the Privy Councl. He (Mr. Scarlett) was with others, professionally present; and they all agreed that Seven Appeals had been decided improperly in one day. It struck him, thee/fore, that although a Judge might not be able to go through the labour of a Cir cuit, he might be able to assist at the Privy Council with great advantage to the public. Berne he sar down, he was anxious to .ask for an opportunity to have the resolution reconsidered, which went, in his opinion; to rob the Chief Justice of a part of his income, to create a fund out of which to pay the Puisne judges. When could he propose such a reconsideration ? The CHANCELLOR of theEXCHEQUER doubted whether in point of for m it was competent for the llo nourable and Learned Gentleman to propose any increase except in a Committee, to which, if it was the sense of the House, he should have no objection, as a means of again open ing the question. At the same time he still retained the opinion be at first stated. The SPEAKER 'observed, that a diminution might in the pre sent stage be proposed in any of the sums mentioned in the Reso. lotions, but not an increase.—The Report was then brought up. After some discussion as to the proper time for Mr. BROUGLIA3I to make the motion of which he had given notice % it was agreed that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman should now ptoceed. Mr. BROUGHAM perfectly agreed with what had fallen hum his Honourable and Learned Friend ; but the part of his remark to which he attached the greatest importance, was the retiring pensions, which be thought ought to be 3,5001. a year. He objected to the scale, because the Chief Justice gave up a great deal for a small advance, and the Puisne Judges gave up nothing for a very great one : and yet the labour of the latter was nothing as compared with the for mer. The Puisne Judges had nearly two months' ho lidays, that is, from the 28th of November to the 20th of January, during all which time the Chief Justice sat every day from half-past nine o'clock, for the trial of causes. His next objection was to the scale, as it regarded the Vice-Chancellor, of whose Court he should say there never was one which got through a greater amount of business, and latterly with great s t:isfaction. Here he would just observe, that it was the business of a Judge to decide the causes ; now his Honcur, the Vice-Chancellor, did nothing but decide causes. Day after day he came down to his Court for that purpose, even when irks health would badly admit of it ; and he certainly knew many men who would rather have their causes hast.iy de sided, than have the chance of their never being decided at all— (A laugh). Yet his Honour therece-Chancell.a,v.ho did nearly all the Chancery business (for little was done in the Rolls), had but 6,0001. a year, whilst the Master of the Rolls had 7,0001. a year, and the Chief Baron 80001. The busine:s of the Master of the Rolls was nothing compared with theVice•Chancellor's, who had the Court of Chancery business, in fact, to perform. This scale, 'therefore, was wrong. He also thought that the salary of 8i 001. a-)ear for the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas trod too closely upon that of the Chief of the Court of king's Bench, ho was Chief Justice of all Ziglani. As to the salary of the , ttisse Judges—and he spoke it in a place from which his expressions would in a few hours be conveyed to the 11:neh—he thought the proposed scale too high, and that they would be well and truly-pail wi.h 50001. a-year—(Hear). When he said this, the House must feel he gave a disinterested opinion ; for it was not pleasant to speak in reduction of • the incomes of those in whose presence he must spend nearly the whole of his time, and where it was desirable for him professionally to hold a good understanding: still he must say, that 60001. a-year was for them quite an extravagant r. muneration, and he believed there were none more surprised at it than the Judges themselves. When the salary of 6,0001. a year was first stated, the Banisters in Westminster Hall were thrown into a fer ment of astonishment, and he believed it was not ex pected by the Learned Judges themselves. The first observr ion was, that the Speaker himself, who holds the highest situation in that House—the first Commoner of the realm, and the representative of that House to the Crown, had but 6,0001. a year, with incalculable ex penes—(Hear). They all knew with what refined hospi tality and dtnified splendour the office was filled (Hear). Then there was the office of Secretary of State for the Foreign Departmert, who had to maintain the national hospitality on a suitable scale, in the presence of fo reigners of rank—who had his household expendit •re also swelled by the nearly constant maintenance of mes• sengers—who, besides, had no house provided for him, and; indeed, whose office was no sinecure —(Hear); for he had to listen to the ambitious pretensions of the Holy Alliance, to fence off all their meditated attacks upon public liberty, in the best way he could—to keep them off his hands ; and he had no doubt it required all his ingenuity to do so—to make excuses of all kinds for them both in and out of the House—to correspond back and forwards with these good people—to tell them that to attempt in England to assist in some of their projects would be just as much as his head was worth —(A laugh, and hear)—then to manage matters in de bate in Parliament ; and yet all this for 6,0001. a-year ! The Puisne Judges were only plagued all day with the Lawyers, but the Foreign Secretary was plagued with them all night—(Laughter)--not so satisfactorily, in deed, for either party, for the Lawyers had often a chance of gaining a cause by day, but they had little or none when they grappled with the Right Hon. Gen tleman by night. Oa the whole, he thought 5,0001. a year wai quite enough for the Puisne Judges: he would propose, then, at once, to lop off 5004 from the Resolution of 5,5001. a-y.mr, and he had no doubt in this reduction he shoul t d have the assistance of his Hon. and Learned Friend near him. [Mr. &Amur'. exclaimed," Indeed, you shall not.l Mr. BROUGHAM continued.—lt his Mtn. Friend would not, he would move that amendment him self. He came now to the main purpose of his motion —the translation of the Judges, which was calculated to have the same operation on them as it was supposed (falsely- no doubt) the translations from another Bench had. He must admit that he never knew any instance of that operation in a manner that would deserve the censure of Parliament. In speaking thus, he confined himself to the Common Law Judges. though, as an honest man, he could nut say that he had not seen effects produced by this cause. In the late King's re•gn there was but one instance of a transl ttion, t h at of Chi. f Baron Eyre, but within the last 13 years there had been seven acts of.translation, namely, the Lot d Chief Justice Gibbs, Baron Thompson, Baron Richards, the Lurd Chief Justice Abbott, Chief Justice Dallas, the Chiet \ 'Baron, dhd Mr. Just:ce Best. Evil' one of thi Arch-Judges had been at common Judge transleed, as an Archbishop was genetally made finm a Bishop, Reverting to dee difEcitlit which he bad before men:. tioned, he preferred shutting out the promotion of the most deserving Judge once in fifty years, and amidst a dearth of the requisite talent, to leaving the subject so open to jealous animadversion. lie meant no offence to any one man—he spoke theoretically. Ile went by his knowledge of human nature. He proposed to in sert in the Resolution, si Whereas it is expedient to secure the independence of the ledges by providing them adequate salaries; and whereas it is unwise and inexpedient to promote Puisne Judges to be Chief Justices, or Puisne Barons to be Chief Barons." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought it would be very unwise and inexpedient to adopt the resolution as it was moved by his Honourable and Learned Friend. It was said that these translations were more nume rous than in former times. At the time of the appoint ment of Chief Justice Dell is, the place was offered to the Attorney-General, who refused it. H's Hon. and Learned Friend had quite forgotten the prac ice of past timesi Lord Cake was moved from the Common Pleas to the Chief Justiceship. Sir M. Hale was *a Patine Judge before he was made Chief Justice. Lor4 Hardwicke was Chief Justice Justice of the King's Bench, and then was made Lord Chancellor. Lori Camden was Chief Justice of the Common Pleas before he Was Lord Chancellor. Set the Honourabk and Learned c o wl- Remus would lead the House to belitve, that since 1810 a new principle had been adopted. Accident ha d multiplied the case., but there was no new principle. Lord Kenyon was Chief Justice of Chester and Master of the Rolls before he was made Chief Jus tice of the King's Bench. What did all this prove. bet that the line could only be drawn, however desirable in general to avoid the practice of translation, by individual discretion, and that discretion must be left with the Crown? Mr. SCARLET I' complained of the inconsistency of the speech which had just been delivered, with that of the Chancellor of the txchequer. As particular in stances had been referreZ to, he would ask why it was, dist while Mr: Baron Garrow was Attorney-General, although three Chief Justiceships had become vacant, he was not offered one of them, and was afterwards obliged to accept the offer of Puisne Baron ? As to the promotion from Chief Justiceships to the Chancellorship they never could be frequent, for the former were per manent, while the latter depended on the chance dun:- tion of Administrations. lie thought the House ought, in raising the salaries of the Jadges, to embody the spirit of the motive which led to it in a resolution, that posterity might know the grounds on which the measure was adopted. Mr. Secretary CANNING would not undertake to argue on the points of pi ofesional knowledge in issue between the Hon. and Learned Members; but conced ing all which hair been urged by the lion. and Learned Gentleman who spoke las., he found the argument con clusive against agreeing to the resolution proposed by the Hon. and Learned Member for Winclielsea, becauso it would lead to a particular motion upon every act of judicial promotion by the Crcwn, if once adopted by Parliament. The monition, if any were needed, ought to be conveyed directly, and not by a sidelong hint,-as to the proper exercise of the discretion, which all agreed ought to be left with the Crown. He rem nded the Home of the question started g the time of the Re gency, about the creation of Peers. It aas thought that 'the authority of creation ought to be suspended. It was then proposed that there should be an exception reserved in favour of instances of peculiar military me rit. Both sides of the House, ho Nevi r, felt that whatever else was questionable, this would be wrong; as it would become the practice—nay, almost the duty of the HoaseV to investigate each case inwhich the Crown might bestow any mark of merit. If restraint must be it ought to be ef fected by a la y, that the Crown might know the limits left to it. Lord ALTHOItP thought that some regulation in the promotion of Judges was necessary, aid t!:e proposed Resolution was only preparatory to the in troduction of a Bill with that express object. He also thought chat the discretion of the Crown should be more defined—* though not entirely taken away. Mr. Secretary Pan. said, the Resolution of the Hon. Learned Member was for an increase of sa'ary in one of it, and yet it went to say—that the acceptance of Such an increase would be injurious to the independence of the Judges! Individuals of rare merit might be excepted, according to the Honourable Member, but yet look at she slur he cast upon them for accepting an increased salary. The matter, in his opinion, ought to be left to the Crown, subject to the responsibility of the advisers of the Crown. This Resolution was uncon stitutional, and as such he (Mr. Peel) objected to His Honourable and Learned Friend only referred to individual cases, to shew that there were some pecu liarities which occurred of late years, justifying a de• viation from the practice prevailing for sixty years be fore. Under these circumstances, be felt it an imperative duty to oppose the Resolution. Mr. HUME was surprised to find that the elevation of Mr. Justice Best was not noticed in this discus sion. He wished the House to interfere, for to that appointment every man objected. He hoped the House would prevent such disgraceful events from again occurring. Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW , could tell the Honourable Member that the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas was one of the most eminent men at Westmin ster Hall. Mr. DENMAN observed, it was said if appointments did not give satisfaction they ought to Address the Crown. Since the Judges were made removable by Address of that House, no English Judge bad been re moved. The proposition of his Hon. and Learned Friend appeared entitled to support. Mr. C. WYNN thought the Judges must have acted meritoriously, as none had been removed during so many years. The Honourable Gentleman said, at the time of the appointment of the Lord Chief Justice a most re spectable Gentleman would have been appointed. He paid the highest encomiums on that' excellent Gentle— man, but he knew that if the office of Chief Justice of Chester had been offered to him he could not have accepted it; his state oc health slid not permit him to take it. Mr. DEN MA N said, on the death of Lord Effenborough the office was open, and Mr. Serjeant Lens was is good health and in a condition to accept the office. Mr. BROUGHAM said, Mr. Serjeant Lens considered the office of Chief Justice of Chester one of a pobtical character, which he could not accept. )Ir. A BERCRObi BY said, the facts on which this resolution was founded were indisputable. Two Chiefs, nearly at the same time, had been elevated to that rank from Puisne Judges. ITo him this appeared to be a course of appointment highly objectionable. He concluded by supporting the resolution. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL could not concur in the state ment made itiy the Honourable Member who had just spoken. The quantum of business transacted by the Lord Chancellor was the greatest ; and he could not allow that the badness of the Vice- Chancellor, however laborious, lessened the exertions of the Lord Chancellor. The question was then called for, and the House divided. F•r the Resolution, 29 I Against it, 112 I Majority, $3. On the admission of strangers to the Gillery,the Carancat.t.on of the EICACQUER was opposing the further postponement of the dis • ussion, which Alt. SCARLITT had recommended. The Report was ultimately ordered to be taken into further tomideration on Friday twit. The Last India Jadges Bill was postponed to Friday se'nuight. • • 1%./ g• pressman a roman fro fogs; of the Clyde Cue% 3W.—Ordered to lie on tl 1 I