The Sun. — London, England, 1828-03-01 00:00:00

that the laws should nut partake, in a greatct or a leaser degree, of the character of our internal relations. T can assure Hon. Gentlemen who fancy it so easy to simplify the law, and reduce it to one uniform standard, that the matter is more difficult than they imagine. Does not every Member, who has at any time brought even a tornfae bill into the House know the ntultifarious and complicated Matter which it is often necessary to introduce into it? Sir, there is not unfrequently atore law in a tnrnpike. bill than would have _been m'f.:i.!sary to govern an entire province if India ender one of its ancient tlynestice. Aug., as long as we ..e determined to leave no titevretinn ‘o the Judge, in t!. .e nistrat.on of the Lew—aeice,-; as we shall endeevour to ee our statetee eepable eef taking. a prospective - ~e, and meeting the various t dies that are censtanel7 occurring in societv—it will be necessary for us to II atne our laws in a manner calculated to meet the exigercies arcing out of these ; I would rather object to carrying the Reuse into those dry detaile of this measure, to which nay Hon. and Learned Friend has adverted, when in the...main principle of it I agree with him. I think that, in many points, his proposition is decidedly good, and that nothing can be more desirable than that the Commission should regulate the practice of the Courts. There .is one point in particular which I would notice. think nothing is more ridiculous than that: stock should be "held sacred from the judgment creditor. There are other pf ;etc on which I ;yeahl not now offer an opinion, i cause I do net wish te prejudice inquiry, but upon tbtse points, When they come under the consideration of the House, I have not dorht that many judicious and valerhle suggestieus will be made. With respect, Sn, to one or two other propositions of my Honourable and Learned Friend, and in the principle of which I perfectly agree with him, I an desirous of making some remarks, because I consider them to he extremely advantageous in fortbering, the: ends of public justice. I agree with him, that it would be ex eeediaglY useful , and I have no doubt the surges:ion will be attended to in the proper quarter, to have an additional Judge in the Court of King's Bench, so as to deduct ma terially from the labour of those Judges to which the Court is et present limited. Such an , arrangement would be, in my opinion, very proper—and the extra business might then be transacted either by a change weekly, or by Terms, as might be deemed most expedient. Much less of time might thus be prevented, and a consequent advantage gained to the public. I think, also, that it would be highly desirable to - throw open the Court of Exchequer as a Court of concurrent common jurisdiction equally with the other Courts. This plan may undoubtedly be found to answer when a Bar is formed, but not, I conceive, until then. There can be no reason why, when a Bar kes been formed, the business of the country could not be a rried on there as free from impediment as it is in the other C:' crtsnow. This plan might also give to the Court of Exche; nerall the adren tageilf an additional Cotirt of Equity, as el thus considerably •relieve the Court of Chancery, by giving to the Lord Chan cellor a power of sending ther e som e of the causes which arc now sent either to the Vice-Chancellor or the Master of the Rolls. With respect also to the objections urged b y - the Hon. and Learned Gentleman against the present sys tem of moveable Terms, I am certainly of oplueorf, th at i t would be of much advantage.to fix those two Terms which are now moveable ; so that all men might be at ()lice aware of the precise position in which they stood, and the exact period at which their services might be acquired. I take it for granted that the object of the Hon. Member will be to fix the Easter Terni as early as possible —say by the 10th of March—as in that case the convenience of the Judges will be materially consulted. I think also that the same principle :should extend over the Welsh Judicature.— WAh respect, however, to the observations of my Hon. - and Learned Friend, which had reference to the present ' mode of remunerating Judges, and which contained a pm position of paying them, at least, in part, by fees—an old system, from which we have but recently departed—l cer tainly differ from him in his view of this subject—particu larly as such a plan might lead the public to suppose, that when paid in proportion to the despatch of business, the ' Judges had used too much precipitancy in the then pro. ceedings zgul decisions. It. might also induce the public when the choice of Courts was submitted to them, to • choose in preference to. another, that Court in which the Judges proceeded with the greatest deliberation. I am, therefore of opinion, that the , wisest, the safest, and the most dignified mode, is to pay the Judges.a specific sum, and not to let their emoluments depend in any way upon the quantity of business that may come before them. I am the more surprised at the argument of my Hon. and Learned Friend, when I remember, that in another part of of his address to the House, he expressed himself dissatis fied with this system of remunerating by fees as applied to • the Judges of the Admiralty Court. Mr. BROUGHAM observed, that be referred only to the common law Judges, and that they stool in a very different light from those of the Admiralty Court. The SOLICITOR,-GENERAL--I wish to be con sistent in my view of the subject, and I consider that any system which ought to operate in one Court ought to ope rate in another. With respect to the Court of Common Pleas, niy. Learned Friend suggested that this Court should be open. Now, as my Learned Friend well knows, out of Term this Court is open, and any one may go into it to plead ; it is only closed in Term, and then there is cer tainly full employment. If then, in Term, there be full employment, and out of Term it is open, I can see no rea son for any immediate alteration of the plan on which it has been heretofore.conducted. The establishment of Ser geants is useful to the Bar, and contributes materially to its respectability. It was of the utmost importance to many, who, after long experience, were requested to put themselves in such a situation as might give them the ad vantage of pre-audience, and other advantages on circuit. If then the Court were eotirely open, it would be difficult to expect that men should devote themselves to a laborious and expensive profession, without having any thing like a corresponding reconapence. I have been told that in Ireland where all the Courts are open, and where any Barrister is free to practice in the whole of the four Courts, great inconve nience has resulted, and that it is by no means uncommon to see ten names on the back of a blief, in order that one Barrister may be secured. I cannot, therefore agree to dis turb a principle which has been long established in the Court of Common Pleas, or to take away one advantage without giving another in its stead. As far as my experience goes, I conceive this system ought not to be disturbed. They is another point in the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's speech to which I have not_yet adverted—it relates to the question of evidence—and I have abstained from so doing, because, after giving much consideration to the matter, I am of opinion that the betteiand safer mode will be to treat this questiOn as one of separate legislation. We are now only interfering with the fringes of the law, but evidence is the master-key of the whole—the vital principle which runs through the whole body; and it is better for those who purpose any alteration on this subject to bring in a specific Bill, and not to,leave so important a matter open to mere suggestion. This is always the course which has been re commended by the. wisest Legislators—it is the course which was recommended by Sir Matthew Hale, again in the reign of Queen Anne, and again by Lord Mansfield. The House of Commons has many stops, in the course of passing a - Bill through its respective stages, which afford time for mature deliberation ; and such a method would I conceive, be much more advantageous, than by making a matter of so much importance the mere part of a system. That there will be laid before the House Bills, with reference to many of the topics introduced by my Honourable and Learned Friend in his speech, I have no doubt,' and that they Will produce changes and improve ments in some, of the defects of the law, I am equally cer tain. - One difficulty I apprehend will be this obviated—l mean the law of variance ; and instead of the present practice, a mode will be adopted by which parties will be permitted to amend at any s t a ge of proceedings, on pay i ng the =peaces. In many ways improvements will doubtless t ake place. I agree that it is quite unwise for us to go back to the days when King Richard went to the Holy Land, for Our time of legal memory—and that it will be expedient for us to bring it down to some snore reasonable end limited period. Having noticed the greater number of the points introduced by the lion. and Learned Gentleman into the elaborate and learned speech which a few evenings ago he delivered to the House, I have now to apply to him that he will accept me as a fellow labourer in the vineyard, that he will not consider me as one likely to be luke warm in the cause which h e has so ably advocated. If he does accept me , I am bound to state that it is my wish earnestly and scrupulously to nourish the same plant under Whose branches our ancestors have b 0 long slept; changes be necessary, if th e b ranches have become too luxuriant or too widely spread, La Will find me ready to use the pruning knife - as boldly as himself. But lam desirous of handing down to posterity the judicial code we have re ceived from our forefathers, with such alteration s only as time may have rendered necessary, or circumstances pointed Out as expedient. I concur in the motion of the H on. and Learned Member. Mr. G. LAMB was desirous of (alluding particularly to that part of the subject which had reference to Justice s of the Peat*: What the Solicitor-General had said upon this point was certainly defective, as lie had merely referred to the great number of justices of peace in the country, and to the paneity of cases before the Court of King's Bench; but to this very point Mr. Brougham had ad verted, when dwelling on the difficulties thrown in the way of bringing eases against justices before the Courts. The licensing system was one which undoubtedly required to be amended, and he remembered stating during a former dis cussion on this subject in the House, the instance of one Magistrate, 'Ain being caM upon I. g.t.,e w !own for re fusing a license, answerer!, somewhat in the laiij i l•.ge-;p1 Falstaff—" Mat! reasons w ere upon comp u l s i on . If rea sons as plenty as blackberrio., I would not give vcu a ova SeTt therefore am o u n t e d to t o upon co m p u l s i on ." His reason, reason at all. The Genie Laws Were arether objeetior,alile part of the jurisdiction e• _Nlagiitrates—hot those Lists be hoped he should soon see : although, even in -his event, he feared the judgmett of Magistrates might he biassed, for when a felon came to receive eel:deuce, and it was whispered he was a poacher, it :night be much I ( 1 ..15t".1 "‘e .ment, %Maid- ' re utdo.st extent which the law Ii the umdc - of nominating Magistrates be lied no. objection, but his objection was, that local circumetances moat influence them and their feelings, with reference to every 4offence c.onitnitted in their immediate neighbourhood. The Learned Gintlemen (Mr. Brougham) had pointed out some of the difficulties under which those laboured who called upon Magistrates to answer. Among those eifficuities it wee to be remembered, that the plaintiff who demanded recompence from a Magistrate, for an injury sostained, ad to give his notice a month previous to the issue of a Writ—had to try his cause in the same county in which his opponent resided ; and even thou the justice had the power of tendering amends. He vished to see the Magi strates possess a little knowledge of the law of this ceuntry, and that such kuowledge should not be confined to their clerks, even if those cltrks had any pretensions to it. With respect to the suoject of rl!esne process, he fully con curred in all his Hon. and Learned Friend had said. His opinion was, that in all actions for debt—whenever the, debt had been fairly contracted—no remedy should lie against the person whatever ; but that in proportion as the remedy against the person /should be taken away, that against the property of the debtor should be extended, ee that the honest tradesman should receive the utmost pos able degree of sproteetioo.—(Hear, hear.) His Hon. and. Learned Friend below him (Mr. Iliougham) broil applied sonic observations upon the question of inte ree-ed witnesses, and efe:n the admissions of the evi dence of parties ; and his Honoured:le Frie.ed had con tended against tio - .reption of such eviden Now, he could eee no ‘.lly, under certain iegulations, parties should not be allowed to come into a Court of law, and tell their own story, as well as that they should be per mitted to state it on interrogatories, or otherwise in writ ing, in a Court of Equity. The principal objection of his Hon. Friend to that was, that it could not be rendered uniform, relying, no doubt, upon the well-known lines in liudibras— " Does not in Chancery every man swear What makes best for him in his answer ?" —(A laugh,)—With respect to that subject, many of the points of practice in our Courts were extremely absurd and objectionable. How often have we not seen a release handed up to a witness absolutely in the box, in order to qualify him to give evidence? The release either meaning nothing, because it might be returned, or not necessary, because the property released was so trifling, that it could not be supposed capable of influencing the testimony of a man upon his oath. On the subject of Quakers' affirma tions he should not trouble the House with one word, be cause it was not one of much importance ; but he was about to conic to one which had engaged much of his at tention—one on which he had had some intention of pro posing a measure himself; namely,-the subject of perjury. If he recollected rightly, his Hon. and Learned Friend said he was inclined to' take away that rule which requires the evidence of two witnesses in order to convict for perjury. Mr. BROUGHAM.—I beg my Mon. Friend's pardon; I said quite the reverse ; I referred to the rules in our Law Courts, and among others to a general rule of evidence, which declares that an accomplice is not entitled to credit, unless his testimony be corroborated by the evidence of a credible witness ; so in the case of a prosecution for per jury, I admitted that a second witness would be necessary, or something under the hand of the party accused, which would make the ground of the accusation clear, and be yond all doubt. Mm'. G. LAMB resumed.—Ve was sorry he had mis understood his Hon. Friend. He considered the present practice as one of the greatest blots upon our jurispru dence, and begged leave to obtrude upon the House a few observations that forcibly struck him respecting it. Every man in the habit of attending our criminal. Courts of Jus tice must have seen that iu almost every case an attempt was made by the accused to escape conviction, by establish ing an alibi, which in most instances failed, in a very few succeeded; every abandoned character was in fact,provided with a host of witnesses to testify in the truth of direct and unimpeachable evidence. The only reason why two wit nesses were deemed necessary to convict for perjury was in older to establish a preponderance—for there being the original oath of the perjured party, the oath of a single witness only made the balance equal; hence, be supposed, the evidence of an additional wit ness was necessary in order to turn the balance. What can be more absurd than this ? Why not assimilate it to the practice in eases where an individual swears to his having been robbed, and where, alter a score of witnesses are produced in the defence, the prisoner is convicted by the Jury upon the single testimony of the prosecutor. There was no rule of law against convicting a man upon the single testimony of an accomplice. Unless his memory failed him very much, an instance of that nature occurred within the last tett years, which was confirmed by one of the superior Courts. He lend considered the question with the greatest possible attention, and taxed his ingenuity to discover on what other grounds than these the practice could be defended or sustained. Some lawyers had laid down, that, as in cases of high treason, two witnesses were necessary, because, said they, " every man is bound by his allegiance—the evidence of one man against the ac cused leaves the matter equal—that of a second is, there ore, necessary to convict him."—(A laugh.)—To apply that principle to cases of perjury reminded hint of an action for assault being brought in the shape of an action for breach of contract ; for (as had been said in the case of trea son) every man being under an obligation to keep the peace, an attempt against any other man's life was clearly a breach of contract, and left him liable to be sued indcbetatus assump sit. —(Cheers. )—So, in the case of treason, they would Leta- Nish a preponderance by the production of a second witness; and between that and a case of perjury he could see no diffe rence in the facts ; moreover, it would be favourable to the accused, for if a single witness should be contradicted it must terminate undoubtedly in the acquittal of the prisoner. Suppose that a Bill founded on his Hon. Friend's proposi tion were enacted for preventing perjury—would it have any effect in preventing the giving of evidence ? When an honest man came into a Court to give evidence, did he ever think of asking himself whether that evidence, which he was about to give, was liable to be contradicted by one, or two, or a greater number of nvitnesses? Not so the rogue who came forward to bear perjured testimony, his only care being so to frame his evidence as to leave himself liable to be con tradicted by one witness only, and so escape the conseque nces of his perjury. The only result of the practice would be to facilitate perjury, and to perplex our Courts ofJustice--a mea cure as absurd as the old Wager of Battle. The Hon. Gent. pro ceeded, I was very glad to hear myLearned Friend, the Solicitor General, among other changes, recommend the reformation of the Welch Judgeships. I have a great respect for the persons who fill those appointments ; but, borrowing a Metaphor from another profession, we may call them the " Yellow Admirals" of the Bar—(Laughter)—and I hope soon to see them rated accordingly.—(Hear, hear.)---I hope that whatever Judges are substituted for them, they will be placed upon a footing with the Judges of England, and, above all, I hope that they will he excluded from seats in this House.—(Hear, hear. )—I t seems to me an anomaly that a Judge should have a seat in the House of Commons, while at the same time I admit that it is of great import ance that there should be one common law legal authority, liable to be questioned and to be called upon to give his opinion in the other branch of the Legislature. I trust I shall never again see the Chief Justice of the King's Bench shut out fronts the House of Lords. It is due to the dignity of his station and to the ims portance of his functions, and to that practicable responsibility which ought always to be kept up.. Sancho Panea said on one occasion, that if it rained mitres not one of them would fit his head ; of late we may al lmost say that it has rained coronets, for they have been given away with lavish profusion, and I hope that at all times one will he found to fit the bead of the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench.—(Cheer s ,) I have now, I believe, but one more remark to make, and that relates to the increase of our ponderous Statute Book. lam sorry to see that the old, plain, and intelligible common law has been thrust nettle, to make way for Acts of Par liament. - Some of the Bills of the itight Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Peel) have certainly tended to lessen the evil of which I complain; but there is such a beautiful certainty in the practice of the common law, that I trust nothing will ever find its way into the Statute Book that can be kept out of it. My Hon. Friend behind one seems to disagree with me upon this point, and-perhaps, if he will not take my opinion, he will not refuse that of no less a man than Lord Bacon, who, in his " Proposal for amending the Laws of England," has these expressions "in all sciences they are the soundest who keep close to particulars ; and. sure I am there are snore doubts that rise upon our Statutes, which are a text lame, than upon the common law, which is no text law."—(Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL agreed with some of the suggestions which had been made by his Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr. Brougham) ; and he had no objec tion to a commiesion limited in the manner which had ~~. .le I been pointed ent by hi s H orn a g sad Learned' Colleue.- agreed that there did exist overwhelming'telantitt. ed husinese in the Court of Krog's Brush, While* Lyre_Judges were compelled- to ei n p! oy tt cir time e nTrtaneh unworchy of their ;tree .. tales. t presen kokti Judges tPi f lin th! tw C e o 'ers T e in rv Cita to nst k :re eee l t- rd ;s l ire f' t - l e e felT d eld was occupied wit4ace' whose absern_e: imihtristineeir. teisinesle stete of • thinen lertee • and perhaps eheonly way of e erthe appointment ot a .ttscie Judge. !• Such a state of . things had arisen from the great increase of business. In the time of Lord Mansfield there used to be almost 200 •causee upon the paper--in that of Lord Ellenborough there were about 400--et. present there were generally from 600 to 800. It was a solecism and con tradiction in the law, that three Judges shout(' be called upon to do that which in reality the four Judges eoiy could discharge. As he concurred in almost every thing that had fallen froin his Hon. and Learned\ Friend with respect to the e;ourt of Eichequer e he would not trouble the House with any remarks upon that part of the subject. With respect to the Court of Common Pleas, he thought it would•be advisable to .throw it open in many respects; but it did appear to him that it woule be unjust to deprive the Learned Sergeante of the privileges they enjoyed, and there- fore he could not agree to that proposition. It was true that the Crown conferred the distinction of Sergeant, bet it was not given in the acme way that its other favours were to the profession, of which he was an humble member, and although he had been so fortunate as to receive distinction from the Crown, he could not therefore consent to deprive his brethren of that source of distinction. To party pur pia' it was unknown, and it teas beneficial to the rnerito rious.—(Hear, hear.)-ITe was certainly astonished at much which had fallen from his Hon. and Learned FA iand with respect to the Privy Council. The great . increase. of our Colonies, and the natur a lly inc reas i ng complexity of litiga tion arising front that circumstance, had brought with it much more business than the Privy Council, had formerly to entertain. That was the simnle fact; but lie never could admit that the emote eetionoi . that Court was iveffiejent while the Master of the Rolls, Lord Stowell, and hii Right Hon. Friend the Dean of Areiree, were among the Judges. From the Privy Council his Hon. and Learned Friend had went at once to the Justices and Quarter Sessions. His Hon. and Learned Friend had opened an immense field-- h e had thrown open Burn's Justice ; but he should not follow him, because the subject was not one which could with propriety be delegated to a Commission. It might be a fit subject for a Bill, for some precise measures, but it ought not to be committed to a Commission. As his Hon. and Learned Friend had alluded to the official conduct of the late Chancellor, and considered the determination which that Noble and Learned Lord had come to with respect to not striking Magistrates out of the Commissions, he would inform the House what had led that Noble Lord to act as lie had done.—Shortly after the late Chancellor received the seals, representations were made to him supported by affidavits, of the misconduct of a Magistrate. The Magis trate so accused not only afterwards established his own in nocence, but convicted the parties who had brought the false charges against hien. And it was upon that that the Noble Lord came to the resolution never to strike a Magistrate out of the commission until he had been convicted of an offence. The law was open to the injured party, and it was impossible for any Chancellor to adopt a more judicious or a mere wise and constitutional course than Lord Eldon had done.—(Hear.)—But besides that there was another consideration which rendered it advisable the Chancellor should not strike a Magistrate out of the commission. If such were the practice party feelings might interfere with the appointment of the Justices, and surely that was a thing which ought to be avoided.—(Hear, hear.)—With respect to the licensing system, he certainly looked upon the publicans as the vassals of the brewers ; but still that did not make it a fit subject to refer to a Commission. It was a point which in his opinion ought to be dealt with by some distinct proposition from some Member of the House, and perhaps a country gentleman would be most equal to the task. His Hon. and Learned Friend declared it to be his intention not to touch upon the subject of Real Pro perty, but he had not adhered to that plan ; he had said that be would abolish Trusts--entirely abolish them. Such a thing was impracticable. A more visionary idea had never entered into the head of any one at all acqtalinted with the subject. His llon. and Learned Friend had said too that he would abolish Contingent Remainders. It was very easy to say such things, but until his Hon. and Learned Friend became possessed of more ingenuity than hail hitherto fallen to the lot of man, it would be impos sible for him to do so, without occasioning incalculable mischief. Surely his Hon. and Learned Friend did' not mean to say, that he wouti compel every man to Make his will in a particular way—and if he did not do so, how was it possible to prevent those questions which would necessarily arise? His Learned Friend wanted a Court of Arbitration. Such was already in existence. But he should perhaps be told, that what his Hon. and Learned Friend wanted was a compulsory Court of Arbitration ; and if so his reply would be, that it was a measure to which the people of England would never submit.— By whom was the Judge of this Utopian Court of Arbitration to be appointed? By the King? And if that were the case, was it to be believed that the people of this country would submit to being de prived of one of the greatest blessings the Censti tution gave, and quietly be dragged into this Court of Arbitration, where the Judge should say—" I will without your consent, strangle and put to death your claims, without allowing you any appeal whatever." Such a proceeding could never be endured.—(Hear.)—His Hon. and Learned Friend had alluded to Fines and Recovery, and seemed to think that that part of the present law might very easily lie entirely altered for the bettor. Further in vestigation of the subject, however, would convince his Hon. and Learned Friend that lie was wrong. In the re marks he had made, and which he should make, it was not his object to find fault. He assured his Hon. and 'Learned Friend that he came to the discussion of the subject with a real wish to investigate it fairlv, and to adopt all the sug gestions which could be deemed beneficial. He then came to the Common Law. It was curious to remark that only about 'lO years had elapsed since Lord Mansfield had been admired and commended by all the ablest lawyers of his time, fur the introduction of that very system of special pleading which his Honourable and Learned Friend was now so anxious to abolish.—(Hear, hear.)—Nis Honourable and Learned Friend objected to the many counts because they did not set forth the particulars; but that deficiency was very easily supplied by tak ing out a Judge's bill of particulars, which cost 6s. Bd. And it would be found that the present system was less ex pensive and troublesome than that advocated by his Hon. and Learned Friend. Upon the rules of evidence he would say nothing, because he entirely agreed with his Hon. and Learned Colleague. His Hon. and Learned Friend had proposed that simple contract debts should fall upon estates in tail ; and Sir Samuel Romily had proposed a similar alteration of the law, but it had been thought by more ex perienced persons, and he agreed in the opinion, that it would be injurious. With respect to paying money into it, his Hon. and Learned Friend had said he would not be content with throwing the privilege open to the public in general, merely as to actions commenced for positive and fixed amounts, but that it should be in the power of any de fendant, whether in a cause of libel, slander, or any thing else, to pay a sum into Court, in compensation, and if, after that, the plaintiff proceeded to trial and the damages given were less than the sum paid into Court, then:the plain tiff should be subject to the costs. To such a proposition as that he could never consent. It would inflict the grossest injustice. How many actions were there for a libel, for assault, and a variety of other injuries sustained, which were carried on by the plaintiff as much and more for the public vindication of his character than they were for the sake of damages ?—(Hear, hear.) If the proposition of his lion. and Learned Friend should be adopted, any per son might grosSly insult another, although he only com mitted a slight assault, and by the payment of five or ten pounds into Court, deprive the injured party of the power of publicly vindicating his character and exposing the de fendant.—(Hear.) Notwithstanding the objections he had made to the plans of his Hon. and Learned Friend, he agreed with him entirely on many most important points, and to a limited Gmirnission lie had no objection.g Ile had bestowed no email degree of labour in examining the speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend, and if he had not touched upon all the subjects it embraced, he hail pur posely avoided doing so, because lie felt that they had been most ably reviewed by his Honourable and Learned Colleague.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. FERGUSSON said, if he understood the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite correctly, they did not object to the suggestions made by the Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Winclielsea, but they thought that sonic of them only should lie referred to a Commission, while the rest should become the objects of separate Bills. For his part he thought that the Commission ought to investigate the whole abuses of the law from the commencement to the finish of a suit.--(Hear.)—There was onerpFint upon which lie was sorry to hear so little said by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite. The subject to which he alluded was that of Arrest, and he wished to know whe ther that was to be delegated to the Commission or not? (Hear.)—lt was a branch of the law which required great consideration, and upon which there were a variety of different opinions in different commercial countries. He agreed that questions upon principles of law might be dis cussed with inpst advantage in that haute; but he thought that all subjects upon which evidence would he required should be referred to a Commission ; and that of Arrest vp peared. to be of the latter description. He concurred en tirely with what had fallen from his Hop. ,and Learned Fiien (M:. Brougham), :.with respect to the present sys -7:4 te.eis: pleading, but he did not See how a Commis ,* could &et with the subject. There was no ground -.if his Hen. and Le: rued Friend with animnistratiem of justic.:. in the East Indies, It ~cas a hretake to suPpese 'that writers were appointed Judges inliatefy after their a:rival in India. No per waa mach. Ljudge until after ten years' • experience, w h en b e n be a b,pl(_•onsiderabie !tnowled7,, both of the laws and langnage et tac zo.ilitry, and it ,adders happzned that a, person was appoiuteo ;circuit Judge until he had been 30 years in the country. Tlis, Judges in that part of the empire were generidi) men o!'great ability and experi eare. It wai a mistake therefor\t w suppase that the natives had no efficient meens of o • ing justice. He did not conceive with his Hon. and I.2e:MAAcd Friend; in thinking that juries could be introduced witli'aity beneficial efrect in India. .It must be recollected that thert).-ivas not, properly speakinr, what could be called a public therll-_ • Mr.. - Sicretasy PEEL—Sir, f conceive it will be of' some advantage to the regulation of the debate, at a period when the diecuseion has diverged into the consi deration of so many and various topics, and so much more suited to other time and Lases of deliberation, that I should now further state to the House the course of proceeding which it is the intention 4, Government to advise the Crown to adopt, in relation to the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. As far as I understood the speech of the Honourable and Learned Member, the object of his motion appeared to be rather to reeornmend an inquiry into certain branches of the law, than to propose any spe cific alterations. The motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was this—" Thatan humble Address be pre sented to his Majesty, praying that he will be pleased to direct a Commission to he issued to inquire into the defects occasioned 'by time, and otherwise, in the Laws of. the Realm of England, and in the Courts of Common Law, sod into the remedies which may be expedient for the same." sow, Sir, I think it will be more consistent with the object of this motion if we could mark in a precise and definite manner the particular points to which the proposed inquiry should be directed. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman has declared his intention to exempt front the range of his inquiries several matters relative to the administration of the law; for instance, he excludes the Court of Equity. The Commercial Code is another branch which the Hon. and Gentleman has excepted ; and the Criminal Law is a third branch, which, as a subject interesting to the feelings of the general public, and con nected with matters capable of exciting false impressions, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman has wisely saved front such an imperfect examination of it as must follow from making it but one object of such an excessive latitude of inquiry. In reference to this point the Honour able and Learned Gentleman has been pleased to give, as another reason for excepting the Criminal Law from the objects of his Commission, a hope that I would not abandon the course of inquiries which I had been instituting into the state of the Criminal Law when I retired from office. On this I can only say, that it is not my intention to abandon my inquiries into the Criminal Law; and that since my re-appointment into office, a re port has been prepared on the state of the Criminal Law, relative to crimes against the person. When I shall have completed my inquiries into this subject, it is my desi4n to turn my attention to other branches of the Criminal Law. But the House will remember that the laws relative to Juries have been consolidated into one Statute ; all the laws against malicious injuries have also been consolidated ; and the laws on crimes committed against personal pro perty have been consolidated into one. Two branches only remain untouched; namely, the laws on forgery and the laws on crimes against the person. As to the complaint made by the Hon. Member on the second bench, I have to observe that one of the results of my labours on the subject will be the removal of, that evil, particularly in the circum stance of re-printing those parts only of the Statutes which shall remain in operation, so that the size of the Statutes, instead of being increased, will be materially diminished, Another important branch in which I agree with the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ferguson) ought to be excepted from the Commission, is the state of the law in relation to the Courts in India—and for these reasons that the extension of the objects of the Commission to such remote and com plicated inquiries, must tend to divert the attention of the Cmnmissioners front other more immediate and useful ob jects, to make the existence of such Commissions permanent, and entail much unnecessary expense on the country. But even for the objects which I would allow to be legitimate mat ters of inquiry, I doubt the prudence of proposing but one Commission for all ; for instance, I doubt the policy of en trusting to one Commission the double and mixed duties of examining into the practice of the Common Law Courts, and into the state of the law relative to the transfer of real property, particularly to a Commission consisting of such a limited number. On the contrary, I think it better that there should be two Commissions. And though it has been said, that in a multitude of Counsellors there is wisdom, I doubt whether that quality be as abundantly fousrd in a multitude of Commissioners. I should therefore be in clined to think, that five Commissioners may be sufficient for one object—nor would I have the labours of the Com mission confined exclusively to them, as doubtless, it would be expedient that they should occasionally use the assistance of professional persons, whose opinions may subse quently constitute a part of their report. My opinion also inclines me to propose that it would be expedient not to have more than two Commissions—one to inquire into the practice of the law and the progress of actions in the supe rior Law Courts; the other into the state of the laws rela tive to the transfer of real property. It would be better ton, I conceive, not to - preclude the Crown from inquiry into other branches of the subject, which may be ar ranged without the aid of a Special Commission ; for instance—a point on which almost all parties agree—l mean an alteration of the periods of the Law Terms. There is some practical difficulty, I ant aware, on this subject; but I consider it one, how ever, into which the Crown may institute a successful in quiry, through its immediate Legal Advisers, without re quiring the assistance of a regular Commission. As to the matters fit to be made specific objects of the attention of the Commission, this advantage would result from ascertaining in this stage of the proceeding what they ought to be, name ly, that eve need not make them subjects of premature dis cussion at present, but leave them to the consideration of the Commission. My impression is, that it would be de sirable that the Address to the Crown should be conceived in these terms, namely, " That an humble Address be pre sented to his Majesty, praying his Majesty to take such measures as may seem necessary for causing due inquiry to be made into the course of :actions in the superior Courts of Law, and into the laws affecting the transfer of real pro perty." This course I consider better than the introduc tion of separate Bills on each branch, for separate legisla tion on such important and intricate matters as conveyors• sing, and the practice of the Courts, must be fallacious if unattended with a comprehensive consideration of the entire subject at once. There is one branch in particular, allu ded to in the speech of the Hon, and Learned Member (Mr. Brougham) which I by no means conceive ought to come within the objects of the proposed Commission of In quiry—l mean the mode of appointing to Magisterial office—and as little can I agree with his observations on the general state of the Magistracy. On a former occasion I stated that I differed from the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman's opinion as to the manner of appointing Magis trates, nor can I still discover ita what hands the appoint ment of Magistrates can be placed, with less chance of im partiality in the choice of them than in the hands of the Lord Chancellor ; for to devolve the nomination of them on the Judges would, I apprehend, open a door to una voidable abuses, besides the constitutional objections to which the abstract proposition is liable. The present practice pos sesses these advantages, that the appointment is made by a re sponsible person, the Lord Chancellor, on the knowledge of a known local officer—the Custos Rotulorum of the county. Now, Sir, I cannot see from that, what more proper per son could have the appointment than the Lord Chancellor, or what better source of information he could proceed on than the local knowledge of the Custos Rotulorurn. And the great advantage of this mode I consider to be, that in the Chancellor we have a responsible person who appoints, and that the Chancellor has a responsible source of nomi nation. Contrast this with the manner in which the Ma gistrates are appointed in Ireland, where there are several Governors to one county, and each recommending his own friend or neighbour for appointment. And even in rela tion to that country, it has often struck me, and strikes me still, that it would be a great advantage if one responsible officer were appointed in each county, something similar to our Lord Lieutenants in England. As to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's observations of the abuses of Magis terial authority, when the House remembers that the nom her of Magistrates amounts to 4,500, it will appear that the vesting the exercise of power by such a numerous body must be liable to some unavoidable abuse—but of the sentiments of the general body of the Magistrates, I am enabled to say, from official communications with them on occasional misconduct of particular Magistrates, that there is no body of men more jealous of the abuse of au thority by one of their number, nor any class of society more desirous that the full penalty of the law should fall on the guilty delinquent of their order. As to the charges urged against Magistrates, with regard to the licensing system, 41 I cats say is, that when any abuses shall be proved to exist, the Government ii reedy te reform them. I If taere be any other official autgarity to which you can i transfer the controui of the licensing systen, I am willing it should be handed over to that authority - ; but to whom will you give it? Where is the local bay that can exer- ' cise it better? I kno* none; and I think the superces aim of the gentry of the country by arts other body, wculd be in itself a great evil. The possession of this authority compels the Magistrates to acquire a more particular know ledge of the laws than they otbervrise would obtain, and by bringing them into frequent contact with the lower orders of society, dives them an acquaintance with their cushene their conditions, and their wants. But by what other local authority, I ask again, would you supersede them ? By stipendiary Magistrates, as they have been superseded in the Metropolis ? The salary of the stipen diary Magistrates amounts to 800/. a-year ; but suppose it to he reduced according to the rate of the salary of the Jagea de Pair of France, which is said to be not more than between two or three huruired pounds— e granting the exietence of a large number of stipendiary Magistrates at salaries of fiv e or s i x hundred pounds, how would , you have them appointed ? By whom 7' By the Crown Pon not the Muse see at once how objectienahle it moat bee.Wese the appointment of such a number of salaried ° be better, ilckets aeeese l the appointment of them should be left with the first jettiCial oiliest of the Crown, rho is the responsible for his public acts, than that those stipendiary 1 Magistrates should be chosen from among the locai reta i ners of great men. How, then, would you have them ap pointed ? By election ? Against this mode also of electing Judges, I would except as still more objectionable, and that from my personal experience of the difficulties attendant on it. The House is aware that there are some counties from which an actual expulsion of the Magistrates has taken place in consequence of local causes, such as in those parts of Lancashire surrounded by factor:ce, and Staffordshire, through the potteries. In such placce, the administration of justice having been rendered difficult by the absence of a resident gentry, the Government was foyeed to resort to the appointment of paid Magistrates by means of bills—and the t - Togreet of these, it seldom heppened that two or more parties did not arise to claim each the appointment of their own friends, thus degrading the election of the Ma gistrates into a matter of local dissension and dispute.— Now, I appeal to the House, whether there can be any thing so objectionable as this mode of appointing a Magis trate, who is, in some sort, °Mit te l, by the circumstances attending his election, to consider one class of the people among whom he is to administer justice, his supporters, and another his opponents? Were I even (continued the Right Honourable Gentleman) prepared to ac quiesce in'the asserted defects of the present system, I know not what other system I should be prepared to sub stitute in its stead. But I ant bound to say, after a very close connexion of many years, in my official capacity, with the class of individuals which has been so much al luded to—the magistracy—and speakin g of them as a body that in their hands the administration of justice has been pure.—(hear.)—lloubtless there do occur occasional in stances of mal-administration among them ; but I am confident they feel it essential to the character of their own body, not less than the public feels it to be essential to its own interests, to have these instances exposed and punished. Meanwhile the publit impression is (and the impression of the public in these cases is always matter of the most essential moment) that they do discharge their duties generally, with fidelity and effect. On the part of the peasantry, I will venture to say that the conviction is still stronger—that justice is done to them by their land lords and natural protectors, much more impartially and readily than it would be by any functionary which Parlia ment might appoint in the shape of a stipendiary, or any other Magistrate,with an income of 500/. a year, or any other salary which might be attached to his office. This, Sir, is my firm conviction in respect of the Magistracy. At the same time, it is necessary I should observe of the Licensing Magistrates, that I am not prepared to vindicate the present system from any of those charges to which it is justly open, and whenever its defects shall be properly exhibited, no person will he snore disposed than myself to apply a remedy to them. Into all points of a mere technical nature it must be obviously quite impossible that I should enter upon the present occasion, after they have been so ably handled in the speech of the Hon. and Learned Gentle man, and the reply to them, therefore, I must leave to my Learned and Hon. Friends on this side the House. I can not help observing, however, that it were much better to send all such matters before a Committee, upon whose re port we should hereafter he able to come to a deliberate judgment upon them. So far am I, by this remark, from desiring to disparage the views of Hon. Gentlemen on the other side, that I freely confess my belief that we are all animated by one common object, namely, the administer ing a remedy to those defects in our laws which have grown up with the general system of the country. I can not imagine what object, indeed, any Government like ours could propose to itself by objecting to assist in such a Work. Every Government which desires to found itself in the affec tionate support and attachment of its subjects, must he most desirous to secure for them impartial, speedy, and inex pensive justice. The whole of these matters, at. the same time, require to be treated with great deliberation. There are abuses or absurdities in the system which the:philosopher would propose at once to remove, or which he would wholly disregard, but which the practical man feels that he must take into his account. Sir, allusion was made on a former evening to Oliver Cromwell, who manifested sin gular discretion in certain amendments of the then existing law, whi c h h e i n t ro d uce d i n t o a Bill. A n H onoura bl e a d Learned Gentleman thought proper to pass on me some flattering commendations for the course which I pursued on former occasions, in respect of other alterations of the law. Will the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Brougham) give me leave to express my hope, that he will not disdain the eulogy which was passed upon a Member of the House, by Mr. Burke, who, in alluding to the fact of his repre senting the University of Cambridge, adverted to Crom well, his predecessor in that honour, and paid him a beau tiful compliment, in bearing testimony to the prudence and restraint with which he had propounded his measures of improvement, by quoting the lines of Waller, addressed to Cromwell, on account of a similar met - it : " Still as you r,se, the state exalted too, Finds no distemper while its changed by you; Changed like the world's great scene, when, without noise, The rising sun night's vulgar light destroys."—(Cheers.) I assure the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that it is in a similar feeling of respect for hiui that I have ventured to suggest the adoption of a different course from that which he proposes ; and in doing so, have been animated by the hope that such a course would be calculated to effect many of the valuable objects he has in view. I have not pro posed those suggestions in the way of hostile amendments, or with the intention of defeating his wishes.—(Hear.) Mr. SUGDEN said he looked with some degree of alarm at what he conceived to be a too general desire to innovate and alter. Laws, as it had been often said, were not so much made, as introduced by time. He trusted the House would not agree to a too extensive enquiry. By appoint ing an extra Judge in the Court of Exchequer, he thought all the Judicial business of the country might be got through with sufficient expedition. [The Hon. and Learned Gentleman entered into a defence of the Statute of Uses, the Law of Entail, but want of room prevents us from going into his speech at greater length.] Sir J. SCARLETT should prefer the introduction of Bills to a Commission. This was the course followed by the Lord Chancellor Cooper, in the last great reform which took place. He did not, however, mean to object to the mode now proposed. The subjects for inquiry proposed by his Honourable and Learned Friend were most extensive, and it required all his ability to compress them within even a speech of six hours. The Learned Gent. coule not admit of the expediency of the proposition of his Learned Friend, namely, that a plaintiff or defendant might be examined as witnesses in their own causes. It would lead to perjury and the worst consequences. He was not, however, disposed to throw any obstacles ha the way of the proposition before the House. The subject had occupied his attention some years since. In 1812 he was assisted in his in • tention to revise and correct the law by Mr. Justice Le Blanc, one of the greatest Judges ever known in England. In case he had remained Attorney-General he should have brought forward a measure to amend the law in several in stances. The defects of the law with respect to debtor and creditor had long occupied his attention. His object had been to prevent delay and unnecessary imprisonment. One of his propositions was, to allow a debtor, when served with process, to go before Commissioners, and con. sent that his bail should render him unless he paid the debt in three months. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman did not wish to go into details on that occasion• He was not disposed to oppose the motion of his Learned Friend ; on the contrary, he was pleased to find the subject had been so ably introduced. - - Mr. BERNAL applied his observations to what he Con sidered an anomaly in the laws. The transfer of real property, and the Stamp Law, operated in the most op pressive manner. The Hon. Member expressed a wish to know whether the inquiry was to be limited or ex tensive. Mr. Secrctaiy PEEL said his intention was to make the Commission extensive. The Ccmmissioner would enter into the particular subjects the Hon. and Learned Member bad named. The transfer of real property and the law relating to stamps would occupy the attention of the Committee, but touch would depend on the mo.ttee in which the Commissioners conducted the inquiry; • Mr. A. DAWSON objected to the present forms of - pleading, which confined property in the hands of trosteee. The famous case of Thellusson's will, bad proved to what extent the evil of conveyancing might Ile aught thot Mouse would not go far enough in their instrucious to the Commission, unless they nide real property conveyancing, th subject of minute investigation with a vicar of making it more liable to slienation. DrePHILLIMORE stated that grievances had arisen from the practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts in certain cases. He suggested that one of the Judges of • the Ecele siastic'i Courts might be added to the Commissioners, with advantage to the public. Mr. CARTER pointed out defects in the conveyaues and settlement of property, which required amendment. Mr. BROUGHAM rose, upon being loudly called 'upon : from different parts of the House. He said he would not trespass upon the kindness of the Muse after the exemplary patience they had already shewn to the important, although : dry, matters of lw.v which he had brought before them : especially as the debate had afforded hire opportunity for so few remarks. The duty he had performed required no , other qualifications in him than a moderate portion of labotte. Ile had been requested by the late Attorney-Creee ral, who had just left the House, to state that which he had forgotten, in constquetwe of his (Mr. Brougham's) inter ruption. His Hon. and Learned Friend had intended to express an opinion upon the subject of special pleading ; and he (Mr. Brougham) agreed with his lion. and Learned Friend in thinking exceedingly well of that science, and that all ie wanted to make it complete for the purposes of a plain statement on both sides, of the powers of attack and defence, was a return to ancient simplicity and rigour, both of form and language. His object was to enable suitors to attain their objects without liability of being met by minute technicalities, end to restore the system of pleading to its ancient simplicity. He knew that at present it was impas sible to prevent a ineltiplieity of counts, because, as the Lt torrry-General observed, while the present practice of allow ing ncneuits continued, it was necessary Sc introduce aereot number of counts into pleadings, and that thus, in order to counteract one evil, another was obliged to be resorted t 0...-. In that he agreed with his Learned Friend (Sir J. S.) who had left the House, and thought it quite requisite that there should be a change in that system which rendered prolixity a matter of necessity. Before he noticed what had fallen from his Learned Friend (the Solicitor-General), he should once more apologise for the great range he had taken when he before addressed the House. It might have, no doubt, appeared presumptuous, that an individual should attempt such a trespass upon his own longs, as well as the temper and patience of the House, as to comprise within one speech the twenty-nine heads which he thought needed improvement. But as he knew that the attention:of the Home could not be drawn to them all separately, and that it was hopeless they could listen again to one indi vidual, lie thought it better to go through the subject once for all, and, by variety, endeavour to make it attractive, more partiOularly as he knew it was impossible that he should be heard week after week, and, perhaps, year after year, were he to examine every topic distinctly. Thelsub ject, however, was one which interested not the House, but the country also, to which he believed there was no subject which at present presented such attraction as poli tical reform and retrenchment; and amongst reforms, he thought there was none the people had more at heart, than a reform of this kind, be meant a judicious, tempe rate, and deliberate reform of the laws, effectuated by experienced persons, and such as were best qua lified for the purpose. Ile did not believe that the people wished for a sweeping reform, which would altogether change the legal institutions of the country, but they did desire to lay the axe to all their abuses, and that justice should be both cheap and speedy, but not hasty or inconsiderate. That was an opinion in wide!, he agreed, as although he thought cheap justice needful, he thought injustice was bad, let it be ever so cheap or ever so speedy. Having had opportunities, from experience, of knowing, he came to the conclusion, that the minds of the people were set on law reforms more than any other. That there were other reforms and retrenchments in the way of expenditure which would more attract their attention, he did not deny, that is, if they extended to thirty or forty mil lions;; but as they thought it hopeless to expect reforms to such an amount, the reform of law was one to which people looked most. For all these reasons, he had, in mov ing for an inquiry, gone into all matters which he thought might be improved, not with an idea that all his sugges tions would be adopted, hut that the House might cull and select whatever they thought proper, and leave the rest to the operation of time. He should make one observation with thattle oithecir mentions c x circumstance sntaottih nothing, e of, instanceshavingof sa w id hich in had not occurred to him during his p ro f ess i ona l lif e,and hoped that no one would supp ose hi m t o h ave b een influenced by any statement respect vain egotistical ideas in making that statement.—(Cries 01 hear, hear.)—What he had said, was that it was a great consolation to him to know that he did not complain of any abuse the existence of which he had not observed, nor did he suggest any remedy the want of which he had not cause to regret in the course of his professional practice. He did that, because all reformers, especially those of the law, were constantly twitted that they were not practical men, wherefore be had limited himself to what he had himself seen. It was constantly said that it was very easy to com plain of a'Leuses, but that the great difficulty was to find effectual remedies. God knew that that was true ; but that was a reason why he should mention what he thought right ; and if he succeeded in attaining one in every ten of the improvements he suggested it would satisfy him, although he was convinced of his correctness of every thing he had stated. The House should also bear in mind two things ; first, that during the whole of the discussion he had never been c harged with mentioning an evil for which he had not suggested a remedy, not dogmatically, but for the purpose of inquiry; and, secondly, that in the remarks which had been made on th e many cures and remedies he had suggested, there were not more than one or two objec tions to what he had proposed, supported by reasoning. Sweeping objections were certainly made, as to the laws of evidence, upo n which th e Solicitor-General differed from him, and by the Learned Gentleman (Mr. Sugden) who had done him honour by going out of his way to perform a feat unusual, that of answering a speech which was made before he (Mr. Sugden) was a Member of Parliament.— (Laughter.) He was sure, however, that the Learned Gentleman would, when be was longer a Member, not take as matter to reply to, what he might see in those sources which had beets the Learned Gentleman's authority for what he (\lr. B.) had said, more particularly when many things which had taken him a quarter of an hour to state were in them comprised within the space of a line and a half—it was impossible that those very re spectable persons, no doubt, who ministered to the Learned Gentleman's knowledge, could give an accurate account of such subjects, where the omission of a single word would alter an estate from and for life to one entail,. or in fee, which must have rendered precision under such circum stances exceedingly difficult. The Learned Gentleman therefore mistook him much if he supposed that he (Mr. Brougham) wished to sweep away all entails; on the con trary, he considered it, in principle, well suited for the kingdom. What he really had said was—what he should desire was—that a tenant in tail should he in the same situation before recovery, or if he had issue before fine, as if the recovery had been suffered, or . the fine actually levied. He never would allow a tenant in tail, in reversion, without the consent of the particular tenant, to dispose of his interest, by any conveyance, for the same reason urged by the Solicitor-General, via.—that such a power would allow him to be caught, at a particu lar season of life, and would interfere with family settle ments. The Learned Gentleman then went on to describe the nature of these estates, and declared his object to be that whatever might be done in the present circuitous mode, might be effected by feoffinent, or any other valid, but at the same time simple mode of conveyance. He considered the law of England as in this respect preserving the pro per medium in a mixed Monarchy like ours, in which a certain fixed property was necessary for the preservation of the aristocracy, while, at the same time, land enough was left without being tied up, to meet the demands of com mercial ac quisition. He also agreed generally, in what th e Solicitor-General said about Powers, although he disliked the niceties of that branch of the law.— Ile referred, as an example, to Sugden on Powers, a very useful book no doubt, but still so nice were the distinctions there collected, that the learned could hardly tell, and the unlearned could not tell at all, what might be the effect of certain words in the conveyance of property. He wanted therefore, to know why there should not be certain for mulas prescribed for the conveyance of estates for life or in entail, or i n f ee , as well as for powers, in order that in dividuals might know what they were doing, - sand-have such aids as were now afforded to unlearned Magistrates, by furnishing them with formulas of orders and convic tions, t o prevent their decisions from being quashed. The Learned Gentleman then went to another point, anti after commenting upon the advantage which the So licitor-General had in having three weeks to answer his statement, observed, that neither he nor Mr. Sugden had denied a tittle of what he had stated to be law, and went into the particulars of the case of the witness Mende, .who had been prosecuted for perjury, in whose case the Attorney-General land refused a tales. He also referred to the case of the writ of right, where the fiat had been refused ; from what had occurred in which he proved the great disadvantas under which private rll9lO likourt board. glad t _.(G rase ; cepti( Lean whirl sweri woulc reaper ea sily Equil : nizan , be prl veil A .c