Star. — London, England, 1828-02-08 00:00:00

a :press instructions not to roduee or show it till A cer' win t i m e, Well, the ease was gone into, and witnesses were esatnined, which being done, he handed forth the docionenr, and the case at once closed. It arose env: dispute respecting 201. and 1504\ would hardly have paid the costs ; while, if the party possessing the docani• meat had been compelled to show it before pvoceedings, the case could never have ante to trial at all. Then with respect to matters of Tort, Justices, Excise Officers, and a variety of other Officers under the Crown were per mitted by statute to pay sums in acquittal into Court. but private individuals enjied no such privilege, and he regarded that, system as highly prejudicial to the public welfare,. and to the fair course of justice. It wa s a sort of incitement to a cartel* class of the servants of the public to do wrong. and an evident injury to pri vate individuals. He would therefore do away with the distinction, and by so doing the money of individuals and the public time would be saved. He was afraid. that the last principle which he should mention would be looked upon with hesitation and with doubt if not with apprehension. But why, he would ask, should we be hostile to the adoption of those plant, which had proved so eminently successful in other countries? Surely it was but wisdom to learn by the experience of others, and to bene fi t from their experiments. He at least spoke disinterestedly, for few people made more by the law than he did, and - yet his great object was to tender law cheap, and to prevent unnecessary liti gation. What be wished was to see all our inferiqr Coons, the County Courts, the Courts of Request, i and others, rendered wally effective; and to bani all those forms, quibbles, and doubts, ohich only benefited practitioners and the officers of the Courts at, the unnecessary expence of the suitors. All trnmperyi cases would be done away with by the principle he was desirous to see put in operation; but good litigation —litigation that- was at once beneficial to the patties and to the public, and just law would be brought home to every men's door. That species of law would' increase, and so far trritn being a curse, like that he would abolish, it was a real ble.sing to the cowtry. How many cases, he would ask, in the present paper for trial at Westminster, would come before the Coutt, if good sensible avbitrators were appointed first to hear the parties, as was the case in France, in Holland, and in Denmark? And what was the average amount at issue in those cases? Certainly a very inconsiderable snetta and yet in all probability, the costs would average upwards of 1001. He remembered on an average' being taken on a former occasion, it did net' exceed 141. to each case, and yet bow great were the costs. But with reference to his first questtort, he' was sure that he spoke within bounds when be stated that the majority would not be brought into Court if the parties themselves met before arbitrators. He did not wish to press that part of the subject any further. The principle was altogether, or at least al most, untied, and whether ultimately it Might -be thought advisable to adi it to the full extent Otitis. proposition, or to grafts introduce it, and to tempt , parties themselves to come Isefore arbitrators, he was" convinced that, were it tried, it would have the effect ' of 'hewing who was right and who was . wrong before the purses were Ipw atid.the passions excited—(Hear, bear). IA the next and third 'Place, he Came to the commencement of toe s soli., The first object of his plan was to provide at once against the.debtoes escape and injury. In the second place, to give the debtor due notice of the cause. In the third plate. to give him no personal inconvenience till there're/nod reason to believe he was about to absent hinny' Ir, and then to lave Mtn free from moleitation opoie bier* audit giro securities. Now the operation eg itfilliaer, as it at• puma rood * was in direct oppositiakto that plan. The law at once assumed a Man charged With debt to be about to abscond, and therefore gave the cre ditor the Power of arresting. In many cases that power was notoriously abated. and in very few cases was it at ell necessary to secure the presence of ihe debtor. He would- pot a case, foe :the sake of illustrating the bad uses which might boom& of the power of arrest at present given by the law. Suppose on the eve of an elec tion any Gentleman who was about to becqnse a candi date for a particular place, aud : he was on a Saturday to purchase in .any shop 201. worth of goods, and was to s iy he would prey for thorn on she Monday following.' Well, on .thee pleiiday,,tirrniug,. a Writ might be issued, the purehasar ofitheipods.iniiiht be arrested, although he tislly intended. to make the payment at the tittle specified. In answer mitre, it might be said be could ultimately be _redressed, but he (Me. Brougham) said' no s that was inspossible--the election iras over, sod' nothing could compensate the party Masted for tha: loss he . had sustained. A wealthy man might. AC course, and .With ease, obtain bail, but even then his inconvenience would. begreat, but with the poor man how 11 ird was the easel. ..peslitsps r unable to find secu rities, would. be thrown into prison. and it was wail known that the men who had been once there, excepti for political offences. never again held up their heads as they were wont to do. The subject of Mesne Process had-already :be brought forward by the Honourable Member for Aberdeen, and he,"ip common with. the country, was indebted so that -Honourable tientleman for his exertions. He denied that by suffering arrest upon eteseeproass the law proceeded upon 'principles of i miles, or of common sense, or of experience. Ilk presearsystetes seduced ilse tradesman into A bad,, al moat a dishossest system: it indueed him to give coedit to expectant heirs and spendthrifts, to a class who rawly paid even with all the power of persotial arrest, and in reality had the elfeet Ultimately of imposiog st tax upon the eonse*stiotor pert of the colanaltaity, who lived , Within theharteans in order - to compensate ter the limes sustained tbrougls &Aug it um easy eredita—tlfear).— Ile would or iot a clear intelligible writ be left at the wellintown domicile of a debtor, and that should be sufficient service; and only when it wee - koorru, or there was good reason to believe he was about to fly his country, as in Scotland, in cases of meditation* Argo, let hirn-he.ealted rapers to fendlecusityfor hie appear-- once and if be was not forthcoming,although there weer no security, let him safer-oittlaWry, iil4l His kienteadolts. be entered upon. Let it sot said k. I* 4#4 *O Bl . ' a-man's• property in his , abreast, beemispom-pa: iup. =done at this time ; and the Croseeereeidekpartyl: eg.through the *licence of the debtor,lleeltinine J irmapossawrioa of whatever property their militlfster; He bad Wow avtived at that point at which i ,piettlei' came to be beard in Court, and to state their-claim& That wostastiginally done by word of mouth, but it bad t been considered an improvement that it should be do s na r in pleading. At first 'that was performed in frearbi i then in Istitt, and dttring the last centurr4twas changed) i into English.. • He: eon/cased ihat lie approached' Thai i branch .of his inquiry with considerable s4,ttation, s • especially liaise stood - in. - die presence of his Master in I the art (the tilerlicircir*enerd). aid he was aware lbw ~ . i whaibret just isfonwation ic had acquired, he bid de• r lived 140 M Ids triitldn. Lord Coke, when opeakiog of r Pleading, iireCsibie iesdelOtiui 444 flealing Purr 0 Be apviied tti;itlyilit.orwittiracelare, and koras his, ( r. ! broogadnes) desire to see it restored to its ancient form 1 and merit. Lord Mansfield bad described good plead- lng as kainded upon good sense; but by degrees it has, , tio changed -its character, that the defiaitions of theme Viable and Learned Lords were no longer at all appli ' ' cable. The Honourahle and Learned Gentleman then ttated the useless technicalities of the present system of pleading, which, he contended. was only calcu lated to mystify and mislead; and preposed that in. •tead of the multiplicity of the counts and pleas new I permitted, the parties should be confided to two, sad that the pleadings should in reality set forth the - aims of the plaintiff and the defence of the other party. Such a course, he maintained, would cheek perjury, prevent - ruinous litigation, and ,give strength to the tourse of justice. He then proceeded to remark upon demurrers, and maintained that they also required to be much mere limited than at present. He would never permit a failure in a case from a variance ; and ilkillfitOrt of his position alluded to the late case of Lend Dudley a Robins. If the instrument to be used d not, throogh error, bear a sufficient stamp, that should be no reason for the course of justice being 'checked ; but the Judge - should have the power of Lading the party in the fine of 201. instead of 101. The Hon. Gentleman then read a letter from a Learned Friend of his. which detailed a case of very great hard ship. The ,pleAlings by fictitious proceedings were 'weasel from fore to five hundred folios, and a delay of nearly two years obtained by the defend ant, to the great cost and injury- of the plaintiff, who was a widow woman. But, bard as the case was, it might have been much were—it might have been wholly ruinous, had the defendant had re semarse to all the means% the law permitted. That suit was in fact an undefended one, and yet after so serious 'a delay the plaintiff had to pay SOL costs to an Attor ney, which could not appear among those costs upon ehe defendant. The Hon. Gentleman then alluded to another case which occorred in Yorkshire, and was re ported by Blackstone, although that Learned Judge seemed to have quite forgotten ft when he penned his eloquent eulogy on the tenderness of the law, at the end of his book, upon actions, and was even more un just than that which he had stated. He then came to the noticoofJeries. He esteemed them to he the very best inventions ever hit upon by human ingenuity—an ito ventioi which required only one thing to perfect it and that was the extension o!' its operation to many of the cases now lodged in the Equity Courts—(Hear.) — Mere was one thing which he hoped sincerely, and that was, that if any inquiry was instituted, some remedy would be Illund to do away with the present system pursued in the Equity Courts, and in the Law Courts in Term time, of swearing by affidavit. A more MO rims stystem could not be devised. Witbrepect to in t ested witnesses, he confessed that he did not see why I credible witnesses should not be heard; and Honourable Gentleman stated several cases in . ich the present system did not virtually exclude most interested from giving testimony. He Id grant a much wider field; and in the case of i'ileases, he would pursue the same principle ; the statute of frauds he looked upon as a nio.t valuable one, but 'sill there were alterations which might be introduced with considerable advantage. The books of a dead per. ire considered evideoce in case be charged himself. Amid not the same evidence be su ffi cient whether charged himself or not? In a case in the Court .f, ancery, some time back, it was suggested by his °mutable and Learned Friend (the Attorney- General) that the books of a dead person should be evidence, whether he charged himself or not. The bpoks of a person in reference to matters of trim, were such. - With respect to the present system of eaamining witnesses, nothing. generally speaking, could be bettor. Perhaps the only thing to be complained of_ was the different course pursued by different Judges. It ought to be reduced to something like order. The two great tests in the examination of witnesses were the test of tooth and the test of knowledge. By the present practice, in many cases, Counsel were precluded from alvailing themselves of these. They were not permitted, fer instance, to try the memory of a witness, by examin ing him as to the contents of a letter. Neither were they, allowed to try his honesty. In matters of libel, the truth or falsehood of the matter charged, when the action was not a civil one, was not permitted to be inquired into._ Another point worthy .f consideration was, the exclusion of evident-es on the ground of religion. Why should theerri deuce of teQoaker be received in civil and not in criminal l eases ?la a case in which he himself had been concerned, the Court would not permit a Quaker, who was a phy sitian, to be examined, though he was the only witness they had to produce. All presumption of evidence was bad. No presumption, as to matters of fact should be admitted. He was decidedly opposed to those conclu sions drawn from what CbanceryLawyers called equips). tent matters. At present the practice was, that the Court always construed written evidence, while parole evidence was left to the Jury. There was no good rea son why this should continue so in some cases, and not in others. In a lease, where any ambiguity occurred as to the person, as, for instance, if a man devised his property to John Noakes, residing in a certain parish, and there happened to be in the same parish two of that name, the Jury was allowed to decide, by the coostructiun of the will, who the person was whom the testator meant to poiut out. it would .be most desirable if the intricacies and technicalities which encumbered the law, , in reference to the sub ject of evidence. could be got rid of by 'some siva c4e straight forward course. The consequence was, that when a man, at his death, set about making a will,it was impossible for, him to know how. or when the sal a ould begin to operate. The present technicalities were, little creditable to the law ; it the./ were removed, a man would know, better bow to deal with his properly. Sup; pose a man lent a sum of money to a person whom he. afterwards made bis. executor ; the fact of being ap pointed executor released him from the debt, while, perhaps, the, posse testator was wholly ignorant that such' would be the consequence. If a man made a will and placed it iiut of. him, as the phrase was, for a moment, with a view to secure his title, be might eventually los e . the whOle property. The late Lord Erskine lost a con iiderable property in this way. By Omit% into opera: ties tAleptsaciple Of admitting as evidence all records . PadOloritiugs. of a party against himielf—by gloat* . lall,petoona IA infamous to give testimony— by by allowing nce co f f arw of o r d n et e c i e nt i o n o t f his th c eocredib i li t wouldy b e e rendered 'nearly as perfect as could be expected. Why should loot written evidence be received in a Court of Law as 4vell as a Italia of Equity t One uniform . Mode itif Proceeding should be int roduced into all Courts, so_ far i las the subject of evidence was concerned. The Statute • • 'of Limitations wava most escellenrose. but it itill-re-, tinireki•setna revision. They should not be. &tetrad by iany fear of innovation from oceadonlitY intiOducing• :limo their system of -law such alterations as change of l o ans &ad earCuusstances called for. Here the Learned, Identleinsin quoted a passage from a speech of the pre- . tent.4tad ?Musket, -importing, " that it was the province of , -fongielndolt lo correct such anomalies as ,tisne and . change of circumstances might have introduced.". --1 Propped up by the Statute of Frauds, the Statute eil 1 . - Limitations was a most excellent one. No.ditchwatio,n Aught to take a case out of the Statute of Limitations, unless a declaration in writing. Another &teat evil to which he must advert, was the, present practice of the Courts with respect so real actions. In real actions, I though the person had been in possession for 59 pleb and this* quarters, he might st 11 be ousted, or otherwise pit to.the utmost inconvenience, by mere chicane and trickery. Any adventurer who pleased torset up a claim, could effect this without any risk to himself of costs, be- Amuse theta were no costs in a real action. Here the Hon. and Learned Gent. referred to a case of this nature which occurred at York some time back. The defendant bad been in possession of the property for fifty-nine years rand three quarters. He himself was concerned in it, and had it not been that the trial was put off from the Spring to the Autumn Assizes, the defendant must have failed. In church rights there was no such limitation as that affecting real property, but why should there not ? It used to be so with the Crown formerly, but not now. The propriety of such limitation with respect to the church was strongly urged by Baron Wood, in two pamphlets which he published upon the subject. Why should not a muillmon tesepsst Act be applied to the Church as well as the Crown? He did not mean with a limitation of sixty years—it• might be extended to eighty. It had been well observed by_Mr. Burke, that no more effectual benefit could be conferred on the church than to take from it everything which tended to render it not only Ineffectual, bat odioni. There was another point to which he shbild advert—the present mode of preserving the words of a trial.— The only record now was the Judge's notes. Now,. the Judge is often a slow ...titer, and iii this respect the faculties of Judges are very unequal, for one Judge will try ten causes where another will dispose only of one: he is also often an incorrect taker of notes, which not unfrequently leads him to an incorrect theilsios.— The Judges never write short hand, and for this, if for no other reason than that these notes may have to be transmitted to another quarter—and, under the present practice, it is necessary that they should be at once legible-1 think it would be weft if we could introduce an improvement suggested by the Honourable Member for Durham, to make use of sworn short hand writers in our Courts of Law. The benefit of that practice is already observable in our Committees; I would have these short hand writers take full and accurate notes of the proceedings on every trial; at the .name time, 1 would not have the parties finally concluded by these notes. They might be conclusive evidence as to points of fact, but it s ould still be competent to the Judge to say to the writer, " You have mistakes the fierCe of this point of law, or you have misapprehended• that legal objection," and the error would be open to correction. If the Judge were indolent or inactive. such AM arrange ment as this might prove a great iradOlooo4 nod, a; all events, by its adoption, he would be selimreal frain much fatiguing labour of a mere antasal nature. that 'it is desirable be should be freed from. Another of my proposed improvements is, that each party, pot only _in their respective pleas, but in •the briefs Prepared for Counsel, should state distinctly the na ture of the action in which they were engaged, and in their briefs their true and actual defence. Fur my own part, lam every day obliged to .open many cases in which it is my lot to be engaged, almost, if not entirely, in the dark. This results from the vague and indefinite way in which the facts and proofs ate set down in the briefs. As a legal practitioner, who has now attained some experience, I can contrive to make allowance for the colouring which the agents impart to the facts of the case in my ,brief. But in order to divest the facts lef that colouring, it requires no small sham of eepeoi ace, and Counsel young at the Bar snust•frequently find great difficulty in attempting its • Another conse quence of this practice is, that the Pk: bett Counse)' CAD never know with any certainty.what Will,.be the result of the cross-examination of Ms own witnesses; ,consequently they are obliged to proceed,with eastioa, and to make what Slay be . called a 'gingerly opening., The difficulty would be !colored, it, 40 s4dition to a greater degree of clearness and preciiion in the briefs. and pleadings, a practitioner were allowed to comment on his case after as well as before the examination of his' witnesses. *I would have him open shortly before he ad. duced his facts, and comment on them at greater length afterwards. As matters at present stand, the fear of t• reply on the part of the plaintiff often prevents the de: fendant's Counsel froin calling witnesses. He is aware a l the advantage his client might derive.feom their testi. mony, but he is afraid of the last word from the other side, and he compromises the matter by declining to call any. It is true he might call them, and the Judge never' forgets to tell the Jury that the defendant might have called witnesses. I am of opinion, however, that it would be better for the administration of justice, and infinitely more to the advantage of the puhlid, if these efforts of Counsel to make an impressive opening-4o obtain the last word—to put forth what may be favour able and to conceal what is disaJvantageons, were abo -1 lished. It is the interest of justice that each party,should be compelled to thew, not merely the part of his case 'frith he conceives most beneficial to himself to exhibit, but the whole of the case, both in his' Iza and his evi dence. In the Court of Chancery,five or silt Counsel speak' on each side, and in the )(log's Bench, dating term, ha'',l' a dozen are frequently beard. In the Ecclesiastical Courts too, several Counsel are heard, and the practice on Committees of this [louse, in respect to hearing Counsel is well known. Sir, alter judgment conies execution. And as I would allow no hand to touch the person of the debtor, except on the plea of medita tion of flight, or,to meddle with his goods before trial, o, after jedgment and a verdict bad against him, I would permit no consideration to prevent all his pro. petty and goods from being immediately taken posses sion of. If any man pretends to speak in favour of fteehold property, I shall set him down inconsistent as ;'seasoner, or fidgetty and crochetty AS a legislator, i*dfy to :edifice the interests of justice and of the. ow sunity in favour of the suppose) rights and dignity of shy Aristocracy, or else as a dishonest man, who !ohne, •to obstruct the wholesome, current of tholes, fortis private:tads. 1 holdpilirathat execution should be dons as, speedily as ?gni*, and at safely as possi ble. I would have only two, specific actions, a re plevin, and delimit. If an action is brought ler the re covery of a horse, MOO take the case to which I have already adverted, a gun. ands-verdict is o'itained by the plaintiff, the luJgo.e.nt will bifor the value.of the gun. Now the gen. itself Anglo to be delivered sip, if in ex istence, or elsothe body of the debtor given.sp in lieu of it. AndtheVaintiffooght only tcrobtain the value of tbe.gun in Caselt itlost or destroyed. On this point Common : aad.Chantery ; I..aw stand opposed to each .other ; thergaimason Law is against, and the Chaucer,' .Law in is erblillif:pertormance in specie. If you apply t oChancert*the subject of a deed, the Cou r t Will or der* tole delivered up. instead of the consideration for which itAva piseedu If you sue kw a debt due on lands. add eater. On - pOistition by aegis, you are madded to re '' di" ' ics bed' ' I cetve e rea . . profits, but not to dispose of the lands ; sio tliit'wten' 110 for money I. get goods of lod, and am told to pay myself outot them; and when I go for the tunnies' of goods,- limitcoori of CcOriroon 'IA, **aide me damage.; the UM et debtor and cre carol* tio country requires reeligtm: more than in this'. Land eacam be taken Onisinili'ilinfra — ctliebti or Judg ment, mad so be disposell of (be alumna of the debt ; L Wise the rents and profits, bet I possess no tight to sell the land. Suppose I hand over ten drousand pounds, which is investe d in land by a dishonest . specebtsw; be deceives me, and I sue him for si e-ific performance in • • Chancery, and only get poihession of land which I cannot sell, I am only entitled to receive the rents and profits of the land, my moiety of which, perhaps, pro duces me two hundred a Jesr, not only do I not recover my capital, I do not obtain the interest of my capital. Meanwhile, the person I have trusted taught at me„. and the only satisfaction I obtain is, that I enjoy one half of the proceeds of the piopertr, and he the other. In simple contract debts, not a single acre of WO is liable, neither is money liable. I sue for a debt, and ob. WO a verdict for tie amount, say to 5,0001. The Mari" goes til the defendant ; be finds 5,000 f. lying in paper, or guineas, on tilai table. all whet specks of property he may take, but that he Ereatiot. Lord Mansfield felt and wished to remedy this absurdity in the law. There never existed a mast of mere acute sense in the ' legal profeseloo, and who had, at the same time, a greater 'lure of common sense. No man ever attacked Lord hi. as a judidal per sonage, who was not jealous of his fame as a lawyer and a ukase. I repeat, - no one who knew his merit ever attacked bins without a lurking feeling of jealousy. He has been attacked by a writer of great power and beauty, but who knew nothing of law. Lord Mansfield said, that money could not be taken, for a grand ree elin--(it is clear from his Lordship's expression, that he wished it Were otherwise, but the cases were against 6;ml—became mosey ld not be sold, and the terms of the writ -required that the t and caste should be made out of the goods and chattels. ow, the argutneot was, that made meant sold; sad that, there. ' goal* and chattels did not mean obney. • Consequently, `Osociey being neither plods nor chattels, 'tor of being add, could not be taken hi execution.. Lord was if a similar opinion, and held that 'honey could not be takes. 'AU a man's property in land was deemed his goods and chattels; consequendy, when the law said, " you qball take his ' 'ft atom " you shall take an." Since drat pearled, II . et . , money bas become plenty, a paper nprdium has been 'rimed, Bank accounts have been opened, trade has increased, Iliad no yoit aft called iljboll to denominate a change in the law 'i t il innoVidon I I defy any man to say who the innovator is— * when my*" change" (skeratiou being necessary), or be liiio says ". change nothing." Down the stream a vessel glides, a boat fel. haws in her wake, a man from the bask club out " stop the boas.-- . .I want to keep it standing." The • fool does not see that be calls for that which is impossible t so it is with the subject before us. Changes are taking place from day to day which we cannot pre ent. All the improvements • we make are rendered of no account the ararius. " Don't change," white, by avoiding dune', you theke the most fatal of chtigea, the unfortunate 1441 Innova tions-.-(Lipad cheers).—To retutu—my proposition is, that all the debts of a man ought to be take , ' ot# nf all his goods; that his per. - refuses to give -. his goods, and • - - falat - ' - - - - not 7gridt, .. Sonils;iiiid li itailiikela ._ ato , .: Up . ..__ that all his prop sty , all his goods, iht:tel .. a be wide av: .4ble to his creditor, be they real or be they ethetwi.e„ I would not take his ' permit unless for criminal or quasi criminal conduct. I would take his persoo when his debts and embarrassments arose net of sash apeculation—swiudling—buying goods, and immediately tenni duos aggajo to ad*, ready money. I would punish by imprisonansen. partly as a means of extorting payment, but chiefly as a punidtamnt fir his criminality—and this I would is, by enabting the Judges Ms 4:modems him toimprisanlitellt for a period proportirmate told* ollhoce lw the Insolvent Debtors' Comet, by three months' hsprisonnient use species of critninalLy—six for ano th er, and so on ; and then would say the laws had been attended to, having been rendered : f r tlre• Perfect as it was possible. Tie Right HonoUrable Gentleman ilr. Secretary Peel) is perfectly aware that writs a error occasioned area' wile, having been the sources of great ndg e tine—the consequence of this is, that hundreds of causes ern defended without merits, for the sake of delay alone. For tisit evil a rev/ obvious remedy presents itself, by compelling the party to' give security in the event of the appeal going against Wen, and then there would be an end to the practice. I would *rest all the Judges with power to say to a debtor, " You shall pay by instalments. I will soundly exercise the discretionary power with which lam clothed by the law—l will grant you indulgence—l will give you delay." The consequence would be, that the property of debtors would not be sacrificed—not destroyed ,--6 doe creditor would Pot be deprived of his debt—nor the debtor ,deleted by hieproperw being torn away. Were this principle adopted, he man would.ilver have recourse to a Writ of Error. or other ream, for the putpoSe of delay. This Would be a remedy—this *mid be an iniprovement—and 1 arts quite confident it is prac esabh--(Hear !) I have mid little or; nothing on the subject of . ..It occurs ipcidentalitonly, hut : still it js.a large one. If a man *sere to ask me should be commence an action to recover a debt of • W. I *odd say " no; for if you have a rich man for your debtor, he will avail himself of all the fictions, all the subtleties of the law - and you asaylain your NI. but you will low WI. in costs."—(ll; Hoo.and Learned Gentleman here illustrated this patitiori, by citing .a variety of.cases—in one _where the sum recovered amounted to 4t Ili yet the plaintiff lost 220 f. in . costs—in another, the sum re. covered was 6171. the less by costs, 671.—in another, an undefended tense, the amain of the. verdict was GU. the taxed costs, 64/.)..... now is this to is. r,ensedied? Re enforcing better risks for the .taxatiort of cow. An attorney, hy being deprived of many of his legitimate charges, is obliged to resort to the creation of others, is order to indemnifyhintstelf.—:(deter the Him and Learned Geed... tnanentensesseed cases is which ettandes wawa* allowed so*• tint costs a atantilanint Witinisaaas *o=o4 and instanced one, .ii particular, wherein expense 0 25W. had been incurred, and 1471. *as deducted from it by the taxing ollicer.)—That evil would be ,diminished, is proportion as the other improvements should be Adopted. One of my principal reasons for bringing forward We subject is, that every day I witness the evils that arise out of the 'paathil changes of the law. The whole system ought to be taken at once into consideration, with a view to reduce the number of enactments. In my conscience I believe that this is the only safe and rational course that can be adopted with a view to tefoina—o Are we to be afraid of . reform ? Were we to took to the Scotch Courts, what should we see there 2—in the Courts of a people as **aloes, and as justly jealous of their rights, as any breathing; for it is no small matter of praise to the old S cottish law-givers, to my that the whole of the Scottish Laws are contained in three mall duodecimo volumes. I may be told—" touch not our Laws, ren dered respectable and venerable by their antiquity." Is that a r.:a on why they should be immortal? Take the authority of Lard Hale, than whom none ever existed more tenaciously attached to the Constitution of the Country in Church and State— " By long use and custom, many, especially that are aged. and have been lung educated in the profession and practice of the law. contract a kind of superstitious veneration of it, beyond what is just and reasonable. They tenaciously and rigorously maintain those very forms and proceedings, practices which, though possibly at I first they were seasonable and useful, yet by the ver y chan g e of ', maters, they become not only useless sod impertinent. but bur thensome and Incorrect, and prejudicial to the common justice and the .common good of mankind; not considering the fronts and pre cepts of laws, were nut introduced for their own sakes, but for the use of public justice; and theceleare, when ' th ey be ca me insipid, useless, impertinent, and derogatory to the end, they may and must b s revised." roilliese were his very.word,s. No greater authority can be cited *pa Lord Coke—and Littleton himself, whose opinions were in unison. Shepherd too—England's balmy lawyer—the author of The Touchstone, one of the highest authorities that could be referted to, what were his words, speaking on thicsubject ?—" I h a ve but gal word to say—to take away the weeds will not hurt the wheat." Qs these convince? If not, if any further evidence were wanting, • it is to be found in one of the ablest books lately published, the work of a Mr. Parkes, a Solicitor of Warwickshire, in which he loci . Atonally points out-the reformi that is waisted in the common law. A necessity, and an attempt to reform the laws it not of very modern •dats We Sod that in 1654, in the days of the Commonwealthi two Committees were formed with that object. At the bead of , the first, Within doors, was that bonouraWe man, Lord Gene ral (Yomwell—my Hon. Friend's more inertial and leas learned oredeemor. Sidney was aeother. From th ese no great efforts at pro ikol, imvement could be expected ; but in the second out of the House was " Mr. Matthew Hale," as he is called in the Recosd I refer to, a f ter wards Sir IL Hall, one of the pelted luminaries that iever bia sed' i n t h e legal hetnisphere--ene of the most learned and en lightened lawyers that ever existed. From these Committees several Acts emanated of the most valuable, kind; some of which still remain. Moon; them were—Acts for the abolition olden and recoveries— ' for ascertaining copyhoid rightl—for regulating county courts—for .the regulating criminal ptosecutione-- , for the examination of wit thanes far the. deireilast en oath. That was an innovation, a liesile innovation—. 4 cruel departure from the previous just and linpitable and humane practice—(A laugb)..—which, having been I waisted by the Ceinnionwealth, was afterwards adopted by the gotardbieen Anse—(Hear). In short, thirty or forty Acts were di ii See years, suggested by those Committees ' deliberated Ws. aid several of thew brought in, sech was the industry and toe, disposition of our ancestors on this subject. If insole- dietely after the Restoration, a Committee had been appointed to examine into the state of our law ; and if upon that Committee sat Sergeant Maynard and other great lawyerew-fifty-one ff tilers ha ail—if they brought in four bilis, -which proceeded thimigla ,A ' -•• •