The Sun. — London, England, 1820-05-16 00:00:00

PA RI AMEN r, HOUSE OF LOR DS, MONDAY, MAY 15. The oaths were admioistered to the Earls of Albemarle, nopetonn, and Granard. Petitions were presented by the Earl of Albe marle, from a Parish in Norfolk ; and by Lord tioniets, from the Hundred of Weobly, iti Here fordshire complainine of Agricultural Distress.— Orlered to lie upon the table. The Insolvent Debtors Continuance Bill was read a second lime, and committed for to-morrow. •--Adjourned till to-morrow (this day.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. C. DUNDAS shortly replied. The Gallery was cleared and the House divided, when the nuu►l►ers appeared— Ayes - Noes 16'9 136 :Majority —33 The Bill was ordered to be committed. 111 r. Sheriff ROTH‘VELL appeared at the Jl,r ‘vith a peti tion from the Lord Nlayor, Aideitne,l; ,tryl of pravilig to lie licald by their Counsel against the Union Canal Bill. On the :notion of 11r. Al.ferrnan ‘VOOD it was m dered that the petition he referred to the Committee on the 11111. It was also ordered that all oilier petitions of a similar na ture should tie referred to the $:1,111t. person from the Commissioners of the Thames Naviga tion appeared at the Bar and presented an abstract of the sums received by the Commissions rs for the year 1819. WOOL TAX. Mr. ASTLEY pre•-nted a prtiti,m from the Woollen Nl4- atufacturers of the County of Wilts apinst the fax upon Wool.—Ordered to lie ow the Table, and to be printed. Similar Petitions were pre3ented from the Woollen Manu facturers in Somersetshire.--4)rderc t l to lie on the Table, and to be printed. AGRICULTURAL 'DISTRESS. Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a Petition from Ashford, in Kent: and another l'ctition from the 1i ester') parts of Kent, on the state of the Agricultural Distress, and praying for Parliamentary assistance —Ordered to lie on the Table. Sir it. lIER.ON presented a Petition from A. W. Johnson, Esq. praying fur an enlargement of the time for giving in re cognizances. It. W. Clarkson. the Agent of the Petitioner, was called in and spoke to the truth of the contents of the Petition, which stated that the Petitioner had not heen ahle to find the resi dence of Mr. Ellis, the silting. member, in town. The time was enlarged till Wednesday se'imitztt. A New Writ was ordered for Orford, in the room of Mr. Horace Seymour, w}t. had made his election to sit for Lis burn, fur which he had also been elected. _ . A is:ew Writ was ordered for Appleby, in the room of Mr. Tivrney, who had made his election to sit for KnareshorottOt. Sir F. BURDETT presented a petition from an inhabi tant of Maryiebone, against the extortion of the Water Com panies. . • PARGA. Lord J. RUSSELL postponed to Wednesday, the 29th inst. his motion respecting Para. WOOL TAX. Lord MILTON said that, as he understood some of Ms Majesty's Ministers could not attend tomorrow, he was will ing to postpone his motion for the Repeal of the Tax on Wool till the Thursday or Friday of the following week. For himself, personally, Friday would be the more convenient, Lot he should fix it for Thursday, unless he wa. assured of precedence for his motion on Friday before the Committee of Supply. After some conversation between Lord Castlereagh, Lord Milton, and Mr. Robinson, Lord MILTON r postponed his motion generally, with the intention of fixiug the particular day to-morrow, when t h e Chancellor of the Exchequer might be present. OLDHAM. Sir F. BLIRDEIT gave notice that he should bring . forward a motion for inquiry into the late transactions at Oldham. Mr. BENNET gave notice, that he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to render Persons receiving Pensions on the Civil List incapable of sitting and voting.in the liouse, excein by a ct of Parliament. BARONS OF THE EXCHEQUER IN SCOTLAND. Lord A. HAMILTON trusted that under the cir cumstances of the times, and the imputations un der which the House laboured of not attending to the interests of the people, and chiefly to econo my in the public expenditure, no apology •was necessary for introducing a subject like the pre sent, a subject which possessed collateral impor tance much beyond what scented to belong to its nature. It was now six years since ,Commis sioners had been appointed to inquire into the stare of the Courts of Justice in Scotland, and though several reports from the Counniisioners lied been laid before the House, no proposition of any kind had yet been made t o carry any of their suggesti ons into effect. Nay, the only notice which had been taken of the labours of the Commissioners, was the adoption of a measure in direct oppoaition to their recommendation and to The SPEAKER took the Chair at half-past three o'clock . Petition wits presented from certain Occupiers of Land in the County of Norfi.lli, praying relief —Laid on the table. Several Members took the oaths and their seats; amongst them were noticed Lord Castlereagh. Mr H. SUMNER bronglit in the Newington New Church Bill ; it was read a first time*. Mr. P. BROWNE presented a Petition from cettain Occu piers of Lan I i.e Sthsvx. praying' restrictions on the importa tion of Foreign ('urn.--Laid on the tattle. WWI, 111 r. INGON prrsctiteti 3 Prtitiul t frnrn Kitlermiitlter, praying a repral flu. 1110 Wuol. on the Table. - AGRICULTURAL Mr. COKE (of Norfolk) presented a l'i.titioti from the Oc cupiers of Laud in the Conroy of Norfolk, conip!aittitiK of the distresses under which the laboured, and praying the interference of the Honse in their hehalf. The Honourable Meniher s•iid, that he did not agree with the Petition e rs in the view th e y to o l; o f this question. When the subject came to be agitated 6r %hoold not. be fottoil one of its supporters; he differed totally with them as to the causes of the distress which so zeiterally existed. The Petition was read and laid on the table. IVESTEIIN UNION CANAL. • Several Petitions were pre4ented from different rinarters. both for and against the Western Union Canal Bill. Laid en t he 'rah!, Mr. C. nUNDA S moved the second reading of the Western Union Canal Bill. On the question being put, the Ho r-or:able Member spike at considerable length in soppent of the Bill. 11Ir. BIlIt;IIT seconded the motion. Mr. SMITH, after some observations against the Bill, inoved't lust it be read a seemid time on this day six months. Sir W. DE CRESPIGNIt seconded the Amendment. Mr. Alderman ‘Vood, Lord Nugent, and Mr. Baring sup p orted the orieinal motion. Mr. LITTLETON opposed it. Lord F. OSBORNE spoke against the Bill. He did not consider that the House ought to interfere with private property. Lord NUGENT said, that privpte property would not be so much affected by the Bill ; but even if it were somewhat of fected, private interest, especially in times like the present, ought not to stand in the way of a great public advantage. Mr. PHILIPS, of Manchester, was in favour attic Bill. Mr. P. MOORE spoke against the Committee. He consi dered that the line of Canal proposed would be particularly injurious to the College at. Eton. It would facilitate an in tercimrse by no means serviceable to the morals or the manners of the youth in that establishment. The Bill would also interfere with private property. Mr. Alderman HEYGATE and Mr. CRIPPS spoke in fa visor of the Bill. Mr. BENNE'I' opposed the Committee. He considered that much expellee had been incurred to make the Thames navigable; much poblic benent had follow e d. The question now was, whether Parliament would destroy what had been plready accomplished ? Mr. H. DAVIS and Mr. ASCOT, spoke in favour of the the isztist cif tits ecativey.lls which it related, lii saying this,, he did not mean to attach any e blatne to the learered Lord opposite, for he had been het a short period in -office-, 7 but the fact was highly discreditable to his predecessor and to the Mi nisters by whom he had been supported. 'rite Commissioners with the ,exception of one, had concurred in stating that five Barons in the Court of Exchequer were unnecessary, and that the beiiness could be easily carried on by tour as in England. He should conclude by moving that the House do agree with the recommen dation of the Commissioners on this subject. If the House sanctioned the appointment which had taken place, the next thing it should do should be to save the public expence of such Commis sions, and to decide at onbe themselves. The Commissioners -had not proceeded on views of their own, but on the description given by the Barons of the Exchequer themselvesee-of the ea lore of their duties, and of the time in which they performed them. It appeared by their own ac count that the whole .tine during which they sat, (lid not exceed 6.5 or 66 days in the course of the year, and as they did tort sit on Mondays or Sun days, it these d a ys w e r e therefore also deducted, then there could not remain more titan two months of labour out of the tevelce ; and they also stated, that the average number ot petitions and memo rials which cumr before them was 1300 in a-year. They sat as e Board of Treasety, but did not per sonally execute the ditties a ached to such a Board. The were ice of the business devolved to the King's Remembrances, who transferred it to his Depety. The latter transacted and reported upon it : the 'Report came to the Heroes, who examined it, and expressed their approval or did approbation of it, when their whole tabour was at an 'end. I hey went on no circuit—they CO9- Ifitllled no Court of Equity open to all individuals ati well as to the Crown--ethey took no share of the Old Bailey Sessions, end of other varied business, as in England, and yet five Barons were represented as ne , essary in Scotland to perform • ditties tar I more insignificant than those discharged by only four here.—(tieer, bear !)-114(1 not, he should wi•b to know, the situation of Baron of the Ex chever been given to the late Attorney-Genie:4l, with a representation that it was an easy sinecure office ? It any thing were wanted to prove this. it Would be the tact of the Lord Commissio ner o f the Jury Court having undertaken the !dens of that office, in addition to those of one of the -Bcl-• Ba rons of the Exchequer. It had been frequently proposed to relieve the Court tit Session ot a pint of its business, and to throw it upon the Court of Exchequer, to give it at least the eppearAhee of performing some duty. Why hed not this been done ? Because the effices of l L of the Ex chequer had always been held ceet as metier of patronage, and were int , odes) to ba kept as Such. The late Lord, Chief Larou heel been in bad health delete.; the has three years. Two of these be bed spent eieeeet, elle on his return bad b een unable to resettle the performance of his (In tim, It the Lotd Chief Baron could thus he spored for three whole years, could not a Junior heron he now spared ?—(1-tear, hear !) —lle bled elready steted that the Commissioners were unanutous in their recommendation, with the exception ot nee .voice ; now that dissentient individual was the Person at the head of the Com missioners, the only one objected to, n ot o n per sonal, but official greimds, at the time when the Commission had been eti apno I ed. For the senti ments of Si, Pry Campbell had long been known on subj.-els of I hat kite!, and if it were not pos sible to attain unanimity, he (Lord A. H am il ton ), and all persons in Scotland, would have wished that the dissentient individual might b e Sir el" Campbell, as he would have less weight than any other, even though in the Chair. He then con tended, that the person appointed, Sir Peter Mitre ray, was no lawyer, and had been none for twenty years, though certainly an Advocate at the bar. Lie had been Remembraneer to the Court, and had transacted its business, but bad never attend ed Courts of Justice in any vvae connected vvith the duties of the profession of the Law, The on l y way in which he was . known in those parts was, for having been lately a troublesome C an did ate for the County of Perth. Indeed, the best way to secure Government patronage web to start for a County on Ministerial principles, or first to purchase the right of giving a vote, and next to give it in opposition to the people. As the opinion of the Judges had been set in opposi tion to that of the Commissioners, he felt him self hound to say something in bebatt of the lat ter. He then entered into a detailed examine tion of their fitness for the task which had been imposed upon them, and contended that it would be impossible to find any men better cal culated for the purpose. He maintained that the paper produced by the Learned Lord as his jus tification, was no justification at all of the new appointment. For what did it say ? That al though tour Barons would be adequate to the bu siness, three would be still better. He objected to the opinion of men being brought before the House without having been signed by them selves, and when they were not perhaps aware that it would be so produced. He conceived that the Judges, to whom the Learned Lord had ap pealed, were perhaps uneonsciondy biassed against the Report of the Commissioners. The Court of Sessions hail, in fact. been reported tip.. on, and the declaration of the Judges in Teply showed how far the highest Authorities were in. floenced when their own case was in question.— In this declaration they bad stated that they were unanimously of opinion, with the exception of one, that it was highly inexpedient, if nut itn possible, to retake the transfer of duties which the Commissioners had recommended, and " that the present duties of a Clerk of Sessions were sufficient to employ the ►hole time and at fen. tion of one maS►." Now would it be believed that amongst those overburdened individuals, whose duties it world he inexpedient and impos sible to increase, as they occupied their whole attention and time, Sir Walter Scott was the principal Clerk of Sessi►►ns ! Had be never writ ten, never done any thing but what related to the duties of his office) if it were possible to name en individual whose tim e had beets employed more differently, anal who had done so much on other subjects that it was difficult to conceive that be could ever !rave doue any thing ilia a Court of Oiee, it would be Sir Wairei That ti pe riots who had almost written more thrill any man in the land could ;cad, should be able to perform suet) overpoweting . duties, was really more than could he believed. That those duties could be of such overpowering a nature was therefore an opinion which ought to be scooted from the Land's-end to the Orkneys.—(Hear !)!es. He did not think that his Majesty's Ministers would have allowed the last appointment to take place, if they had been aware of its nature ; for he could not believe that they Would be felt) de se, and nothing was more calculated to create disgust than such proceedings. He then read some extracts from the Report of theConsmissioners showing that theßarons of the Exchequer had no control!! what ever over the charges of the Treasurer. Should the decision of the House be in favour of the late appointment, it would not carry conviction to the people or to the Bar of Scotland. Such was the opinion entertained of this transaction in that country, that he a , jured the House to consider deeply the vote they should give. The lime might not be distant when this transaction would meet him in the County of Lanark from the tumults of those whom he was celled upon as Deputy Lord Lieutenant to repress. How could he jus tify what he so sincerely disapproved ? With what collier of consistency could he put down with the point of she sword those whom distress drove to madness, it the House should do these things without compunction ? Those men, though poor and in misery, were not dull of iiitelligence, and their numbers were multiplied by acts like these. —(Hear, hear !)—Bills bad been passed to pre• vent public meetings, and he had voted partially for them but this was a subject oo which public meetings might be held, and it was a pity that the people could' no longer express their senti ments. He concluded by moving that the House do agree with that part of !he Report of ihe Com niissionets appointed to inquire into the state 'ot the Courts of Justice in Scotland, relative to the Cottle of Exchequer, which stated, '' that five Barons were more than necessary, and that the business of the Court of Exchequer might be con ducted with equal advionage by four, as in the Court of Exchequer in lingland, and without add ing materially to their duties." The Lorin ADVOCATE contended, that an iosti oe ion estebiiseed oy. a national compact, and which had proved beneficial during the course of a century, should not be hastily done away. if the recommendaiion of the Report were adopted, the alteration should be deeply considered, and till it was resolved upon, the number of the Be rolls of the Excheq er should not be changed.— It was known to toe House, that the introduc tion of Jury Courts was new to Scotland.— It was introduced against the prejudices of the people, and merely as an experiment. On that account no new Judges had been appointed, the former had acted in both Courts, that in case of a failure they might remain in the situation which they formerly held. It was wonderful how that Court had succeeded, and its success was to be at tributed to the great zeal and diligence with which its duties had been performed. The Judge had even introduced ass Act into Parliament, which had not produced hint arty benefit, but had considerably added to his labours. It also happened, that two individuals of the Jury Court were likewise Judges of the Court of Session and of the Court of Justiciary, where they did much business. Ile maintained that the, report at the Commis. sioners bad not only not been unanimous, but thatithey had no power or right by law to decide on the subject. He then defeeded the appoitit ment of Sir P. Murray, who possessed a degree of knowledge of the Scotch law which had not been attained by any other individual. IVith the exception of one year which he had spent in London, Sir P. Murray haul since 1799 dis charged the ditties of King's Remembrancer of the Exchequer. He had chosen to attend that Court as principal Reinembrancer, and his expe rience in that capacity had better qualified hitn for the office of Baron- . then any law practice.. Precedents of a similar kind were to be found both in Scotland and in England. In the for mer, Baron Stuart Moucrieff had been appointed in consequence of having acted as Deputy King's Rementhrancer, anti in the latter Bat tin Perrott had also been made one of the Exchequer Judges because be had for many years filled air - office in the Court of Exchequer. By the appoint ment of Sir P. Murray, a considerable saving had been effected as the office of King's Remem brancer ceased with 'him, and a salary equal to half that which be received as Baum of Ex chequer fell in to the public. He maintained that no pledge bad ever been given that he appointment should not be filled up, and that there was no foundetioit for the ridiculous rumour that it - was intended to appoint an additional Judge. The Act of Union which declared that Scotland should have a Court of Exchequer, also fixed the number of the Ba rons at five:—(Hear, bear !)—The Act of Queen Anne said, that at no time the- number should be more than five.--e(Hear, hear!)--This way of wording the Act was necessary, for had it said that the Court should consist of five Barons, the death of one of its members would have rendered the whole Court incompetent. Souse latitude of expression way therefore allowed, but he was con vinced that the bitent of the framers of the Act was, that five Barons should be appointed, as in fact it had been done then, and ever since. In England the people were accustomed to see the deity performed by tour Barons, but in Scotland, and he admitted it might be a prejudice, they pre ferred hailing five. Neither were their ditties as insignificant as they had been represented. - They had considerably increased with the increase of the Revenue. They had to pass charters of landS belonging to tine Ceown, besides their judi cial if their number should be reduced to tour, and the two Barons should differ trout the other two, as there was no other Court to appeal to, no charter of land on which the electioo for counties, as' the Noble Lord had stated, might de pend, could be passed. To obviate 61101 ail evil ther e w a s no ot h er reme d y t h an the appormnient which had taken place. And what was there against these advantages ? Nothing teat the Repart of a Parliamentary Commission, recommending iii one sentence, that one of the Barone of the Exchequer should be left out entitely. There wal §ttKir,rt the Opihlons .idnals who h a d named the report. Vier: exceeded their po wers , as t h ey were directed fir to inquir e i nto '' the sal a ri e s, fe es , an d etn° l ments of the several officers, clerks, and minisTi, of justice." He wished to know under w hic if head it was supposed thist the Judges cone. o f the constitution of the Court and the numberbi Judges necessary had been to he inquired into' those Commi ss i oners , t h e J u d ges of course Otio‘f have been ihe first to be named, but nothinfc the kind W a s th oug h t o f, as t h e i nqu i r y tended to be similar to those instituted in I"; 1093, 1732, IW, nd 178 S. O n t h o se - oc c :f sions, it could not be shown from the record s the House, that the inquiries bad ever e xted e , to the Judg es , or to t h e const i tut i on o f t h e Coo rr d The Noble L or d, h e r emar k e d , might have' W I ; some of the ob servat i ons w hi c h he had mode, one venerable Judge, now advanciug to his 1 1111- . tieth year. Th a t w hi c h bat! been advanced 11' , Specting that individual he would take upon I ) self to say was illiberal—was einfounded.—( o ' ' of " Older, order !") The SPEAKER said expressions had Wien fol the L earne d L or d wh i c h were integiskr, t ln t which he thought he could not have ittrendc` o use. The Loan ADVOCATE was ready to make 11 : 1/ apology if he had expiessed himself itnpropet o ' ; tie, how ever , f e l t strongly thatehe iemat ks wh it o had been mad e on the venerable p erson to er h"' , be bad elluded mi g h t have bee n spirted. ' Commissitthers, he proceeded to show, It gin.° be ptestmed, were ill valified to give en or itri"'' on the constitution of the Court. One of !i! had for a co ns id era bl e per i o d b een r et i r ed l l ' country--another hail passed some vears-in lit • and the third had not for a long time preetiseti yl the Bar. These Gentlemen were pertectle to Condnet au inc/oily into the sulAneS, emoluments of tie Officers of the Court ; 176 from their- previous hi bits, to decide on the c" le stitutiou of the Court itself, they were wholly tat' - (plalified. 'Theirittltort, therefore, ought il ot ilaVe any mat etiai weight with the House ; even il l stood alone ; but wheti they had opposed to it 0 e . great autho r ity o t Sir Hay Campbell, one o f 4: 14 coadjutors of the. Commissioners who trained o ' 4 l report, together with that of the Chief Baro . ii S. Shepherd), whose judgment it was 011110'= impossible to .think would he other than ive: partial, fair, and right ; they must pause hefoi d they pledged themselves to adopt the course re: f commended in the report. lint it was hiotc. that Ministers wished to avoid all th e re „,,,lir° which the Commissioners had suggested. IP ° was not the fact.. The first instructions whic ft ,report received after th e i r eport was made, wet P, ; prepare Ac ts o f P ar li ament f oun d e d oo it. La ss December he had given notice of two Bills to 0 , 1 wave the Court of S e s s i on afiti t h e C ourt o f .4 . V: mitalty. Some delay had unavoidably occorW i but the time had not been lost. 'The Measures i ° be proposed to Parliament had been submitted ft/ the highest Law Authmities in Scotland, and bad now brought them up - with him with' the Or probation of all whose opinions on such subjee'i were valuable, and the several Reports or Commissionets, 'where it was . practicabh. an d 41c# sirable, would be acted npon one after another Kb fast as . possible. Wl:at they had suggest e d wool" be brought before the Hou3e. A more extenst 4 reduction tile's bad yet been recommended possibly be effected, but at all events ttte subjl would receive the full e st consideratiOn. It 1 0 4 been siiid that the •here Lord .Chief • Baron lo beets absent for three years. This was a inistali He had never been absent bet one year, and 11"' always regularly attended in terns time. Lord A. HAIVILTON end the LOU) ALVoCA.-01 severally explained. Sir 3. NewPfinT contended, that the cono - c / of Alioisters, with respect to the CommissiolP ought to be viewed with the greatest jealoosy,'!P they had objected to it at first, and delayed it ":' 1 terwards for seven months, and only appoititctl''" when a notice was given ot further proceeding`' `a the subject in that . "loose. If ;he Noble LoC' was correct in his argument with , rest cut to the powers of the Commissioners, they ought to li t/ brought to disgrace, for in that case it would or pear they were not espial to perform the task or . • signed to 'them, as the first thing they did was f ! mistake the pat'ore of their powers. B u t was.ll". to be gravely argued five years after their uppoia!' mew, and-after so many reports had been recei°: ed front these Commissioners The Learoe w Lord had contended, that five Batons w e re re quire(' under the articles of the Union ; but, b c , cause the Act of Uoion said that ther e s h ou ld 0‘?" be more than five Barons, it was most e x t-rani" 'homy that 'the Noble Lord should contend 1 0 , that Act would not be satisfied if fewer than fi e ." were appointed. The subject ought now i ll be inquired into, and he contended fhat t i ' g situation ought and should have b e en keil vacant ; for was it nothi ng , if, on i nqu i r y, should be found that the Constitutiorr of the Cotir 4 might be advantageously altered,. to say here 0 0 another Judge to be provided for, as he most b removed from his situation without any fault O f his part. It was said that the Commissione r , were unfit to conduct the i n qui r y on w hi c h th e i, had entered. If it were so, it should be reale° bered that they had b een a pp o i n t e d b y hi s ilia: jesty's Mi n i s te r s ; b ut : i t was never foun d e d o that they were improper persons till it was g e e that their Report went to touch that patroll- ; by which Scotland h a d . so l ong b een gove rne f The Noble Lord had referred to the authority Sir Campbell; but.lte, though be did not colic' with the other C omm i ss i oners -i n t hi s R epo rt, D; proved of a simil a r i nqu i r y w i t h res p ect to tit; Judges of England: The Learnt(' Lord o ° 4 l . not to make Sir 1. C a mpb e ll bl ow h ot a nd c 01 ‘ 11 ; he ohu.ht to take the wh o l e o f hi s statement, i f fic relied on it at all ; fo r th e aut h or i ty o f the pres e rd Chief Baron be had the sincerest respect he had the means, of forming a jad%'illeta, but 1),3 This case his decision h a d b een - 'given, rii n ;,,., had been but N one CN 11148 CS Sion of the 01' a c 1 0 which lie now filled, The bosiness of the C orr he contended, in oppo s iti on t o th e L or d Advac °e, ~,,.. bad not increased ; ant).he , tvco, the wP`f thooght that instead of ) frustrating the obje ct " i!v o e; the Commissioners, it would be better to dis' lie Commissioh altogether. a•J Lord CASTLEREAGII the N-Jble. Lor- 14 0, - if, t ;: v : 11" (