The Sun. — London, England, 1830-06-18 00:00:00

de chemists of Newcastle against the Stamp Duties Act. The Marquis of BLANDFORD presented a pe tition from the Rev. Sir Harcourt Lees, against the Bill for assimilating the duties in Ireland and Eng and, and another from Kenningham, in Norfolk, for reform in Parliament. Mr. BRIGHT wished to know from the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he meant to bring in his Bill respecting the assessed taxes. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no objection to postpone the Bill if the House so wished, but could see himself no reason why he should not proceed with it at once, as it was but a measure for remitting certain taxes. WEST INDIA INTEREST. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the West India merchants of Bristol, against the proposed in crease of duty (Gd.) on rum. The HON. MEMBER also presented a petition from the tea-dealers of Glamorganshire against the Hawkers' and Pedlars' Act. Lord J. RUSSELL postponed his motion re specting the fees incident to a suit in the Court of Chancery. JEWS' RIGHT TO HOLD LANDED PROPERTY. Colonel WILSON should not take up the time of the House with his motion. He would merely ask for leave to bring in his Bill, arid should take the discussion on the second reading. His object was, in the words of his motion, " to remove doubts as to British-born Jews holding landed property." The Bill did not, he begged it to be borne in mind, originate from the Jews themselves, but from men of birth, education, and wealth, who, like himself, lamented the uncertainty of legal opinions on the subject. He was aware that the opinions of the high law-men at present were, that the Jews might bold landed property like other British subjects ; but though that was the present dictum of lawyers, it did not follow that it would be the opinion of their successors. He had himself been in treaty for the purchase of a landed propeity some years ago, and took the opinion of Sir S. Romilly, as it was a Jew tenure, and the result was that he was dis suaded from the purchase, because that great law yer had given it as his opinion that Jews had no right to bold landed property like British subjects. It was time that the questio►► should be set at rest, and that the law should be clearly defined. It was but just that the Jews should be admitted to all the advantages of the Constitution compatible with its safety. He, for one, would so admit them, except ing to seats in Parliament, and on the bench as Judges. Indeed, he was convinced that had the Jews been admitted forty or fifty years ago to the advantages of the Constitution, to the extent he had just specified, many of them would since have emigrated towards the Christian Religion.— (Laughter.)—The Hon. Gentleman concluded with moving for leave to bring in his Bill. Mr. R. GRANT would vote against the Hon. Gentleman's motion, because, under existing cir cumstances, to which he need not more particularly allude, and to the state of the public business, he felt he should not be doing his duty to the body whose cause he had a few weeks ago unsuccessfully advocated, if he permitted their claims to be again discussed this Session.—(Hear.) Either, as the matter at present stood, the whole of their claims should be granted or none at all; he should not con sent to any fragmental compromise, like that pro posed by the Hon. Gentleman. The gallery was then cleared for a division, but we understood the motion was negatived without One. NEW CHURCHES. Mr. HU.ME rose to move that the petit!on from the inhabitants of St. Luke's, against the Commis sioners for building churches, be referred to a Select Committee. He said that the present amount of poor-rates was 24,0001. in that parish, and they owed a debt of 15,0001. They had two churches already, which were not half filled, and yet the Commissioners were going to build an additional one, against the feeling of all the parishioners. As a proof of the connexion which subsisted between the parish and the clergyman, he should only relate a single anecdote :—On Tuesday, when the inhabi tants had legally met in vestry, in the church, to transact some business connected with the poor, the Rev. Mr. Rice entered ; took his seat with the clerk at the desk, and commenced divine service, merely for the purpose of interrupting the business of the parishioners, who immediately, one and all, left the place. He complained in the strongest terms of this attempt to impose fresh taxes upon the parish. Mr. ESTCOURT said that the Commissioners bad ascertained that there was only accommodation for 1,200 in the present church, while the population amounted to 32,000. It was therefore clear that a new church was necessary. Mr.BYNG could say, most positively, that the sense of the petitioners was adverse to the decision of the New Church Commissioners. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended the conduct of the Commissioners. Mr. WAITHMAN supported the motion. He thought the petitioners entitled to have their case in quired into. • Mr. J. WOOD was of opinion that the Commis sioners for building churches had been the dupes of artful manoeuvres, in consequence of their want of local knowledge. Dr. LUSHINGTON, one of the Commissioners, defended their conduct. After a few words from Mr. HUaIE in reply, the /House divided — For the motion. Against it. Majority against the motion —5O CONDUCT OF GENERAL DARLING. Mr. STEWART (of Beverley) rose to bring forward his motion for the production of papers and documents connected with the charges preferred by Mr. Wentworth, of New South Wares, against Gen. Darling, the Governor of that colony. In Nov. 1826, General Darling altered the sentence of two soldiers convicted at the Quarter Sessions there of a felony, and sentenced to seven years' transporta tion, and instead of allowing them to undergo that punishment, he issued a regimental order, directing that they should be worked in chains in the public roads for the period of seven years ; that they should be stripped of their uniforms, and dressed in felons' clothes; and that they should be worked in chain gangs, after being drummed publicly on parade out of the garrison, us rogues. That order was carried execution; the chains were put upon the two a k e..., whose names were Sadds and Thompson, on parade, and they were brought in that condition back to gaol, In a few days after, one of the unfortunate men, Sadds, died in consequence, it was stated, of the sufferings which he endured in the prison, being at the time in a state of bad health, and a statement of the transaction having been forwarded to this country, he (Mr. Stewart) felt it his duty to move for the production of such documents as were in the possession of his Majesty's Government respecting the transaction. So strong was the present case, that he thought he should be almost justified in calling upon the House to address the Crown to takinove General Darling from his situation. — ft was stated in the documents which had induced him (Mr. Stewart) to bring forward a motion on a former occasion in reference to this matter, that the chains which were put upon those unfortunate mutt were of an unusually heavy construction, that they were not long enough to allow them to stretch themselves at full length, and that there were spikes in the iron collars which prevented them from lying easy in any position. In one of the letters of Gen. Darling which had been laid before Parliament, he stated that the chains were of an unusually light construction, that their weight amounted only_ to 131 b. 12 oz., and th a t th e y were not calculated to subject the persons upon whom they might be put to any extraordinary pain. He (Mr. Stewart) must say that he relied at the time upon the truth of that statement, but it was refuted in the documents which lie now held in his hand, wherein it was stated that the weight of the chains amounted to 301 b. or 401 b., that they were of such a construction as to subject these unfortunate men to dreadful torture, such as could not be endured; that there were iron spikes extending from the iron collar, which was rivetted round the neck, and which prevented the individual wearing them from turning over on either side ; that it was impossible these men while thus chained could stretch themselves at full length, and in short, they were in this manner subjected to the greatest possible torture. These facts he stated upon the authority of an officer, Captain Robinson, who had inspected those chains, had tried them on his own body, and had come to the conclusions which he (Mr. Stewart) had just stated with re spect to them. Captain Robinson did not weigh the chains, but he had them on in the presence of Lieutenant Christie and others, and in reply to a question from them be said he considered the weight of the chains to be about 301 b. or 401 b. He held in his hand a statement of what took place after the chains had been put on those unfortunate men. They were taken from the barracks, where the chains were put on them, back to the gaol, until an opportunity should arise for sending them to work on the public roads. Sadds, it appeared, had been previously alarmingly ill, and it was sworn by Thompson, who had been confined with him, that after his return to the prison his illness rapidly in creased until the period of his death, which occurred fire or six days after the infliction of the punish ment. The punishment was inflicted on the 22d of November, and he died on the 27th of that month. He should now call the attention of the House to the statement of Thompson, the fellow prisoner of Sadds, as to what occurred while that unfortunate man remained in the prison, previous to his death. This statement was extracted from an examination of Thompson, taken on the 23d April, 1827, in the presence of Alexander M‘Leay, Esq., Colonial Secretary ; William Henry Moore, Esq., Acting Attorney-General, and William Charles Wentworth, Esq., Barrister-at-law. In that ex amination Thompson says—" The night of the day of our punishment Sadds was so ill that we were obliged to get a candle about eight o'clock from Wil son, the under-gaoler, in order to keep a light during the night. I gave him some tea which I had pur chased. About ten o'clock he was getting very ill. I requested a fellow prisoner to get up and look at him, thinking he was dying. The fellow prisoner, whose name I do not know, did look at him, and said he was not dying, but he did not think he would live long. I then asked Sadds if he had any friends to whom he would wish to write. He said he had a wife and child in Gloucester, and begged that if he did not get better by the next night, I would read some pious book to him ; adding that they had put him in them irons until they had killed him.' Shortly after this I fell asleep, another man having undertaken to sit up with him ; I think the name of this man was Moreton ; his father is a potter on the Brickfield-hill ; he was in the gaol for an assault on his mother. At eight o'clock the next morning, being Thursday, the 23d, Sadds was taken into the hospital, and I took him some tea and a little bit of fish, which I think is all he eat till he died. This I think because I had his gaol-rations afterwards. His irons were taken off about twelve o'clock on Thursday, when the doctor came his rounds. I inquired of the attendant in the hospital (whose name was Thompson) how Sadds was on Thursday evening ? He said he was a little better —on Friday morning I went to see him, he was in such a state that he did not answer my questions or appear to know me; I squeezed his hand, but he made no return and appeared to be insensible. I saw him again on Saturday, I heard he had been deliri ous, and had got out of bed on Friday night ; but before twelve o'clock on Saturday he never spake ; and about three o'clock on Sunday the 26th Novem ber, he was removed to the general hospital, being carried on the shoulders of two men down the steps of the gaol to the entrance, and from thence carried in a small cart, as I was informed, to the hospital. I was told that he expired about six o'clock on Monday morning." Here they had the dying decla ration of this unfortunate man, Sadds, "that they had put him in them irons until they had killed him." He was carried from the gaol to the hopital in a dying state, when be had ceased to speak, and the object, it was stated, of thus removing him, was to prevent a coroner's inquest from being held on his body, which would have been held on it if he had died in the gaol. He believed that it was sug gested after his burial, that his body should be dis interred for the purpose of having a coroner's in quest held upon it, but that suggestion was riot complied with. Thompson, whose statement he had just quoted, was now also in England. He (Mr. Stewart) believed he had arrived a few days ago at Chatham, where he now was, and he could be examined as to the truth of that statement. He had stated the facts of this case; they involved a grave and serious charge against General Darling, and there were two persons now in England, Lieu tenant Christie and this man Thompson, who could be examined as to the truth or falsehood of that charge. The lion. Member concluded by moving for a copy of the letter of William Charles Went worth, Esq., barrister, dated Ist of March, 1829, addressed to Sir George Murray, and transmitted through General Darling, together with such docu ments as General Darling accompanied and explained that letter, and also copies of all letters which had been transmitted by his Majesty's Government to him in reference to it. Sir GEORGE MURRAY would not object to the production of such documents as he (Sir Geo. Murray) might find on examination to be fit, arid proper, and necessary to he produced for the eluci dation of this case, and the facts connected with it. In taking that course he did not mean to pledge him self to the production of the specific documents for which the Hon. Member had moved, as he was not able to say at present whether all those docu ments were such as should be submitted to the House. This case was the subject of a motion which the Hon. Member had brought forward in July, 1828, when lie moved for certain papers, which were produced. The case had been then briefly discussed. The fact was, that it had been a practice with the soldiers in New South Wales to maim themselves, or to commit some felony, by which they succeeded in getting discharged from the service. These two individuals in this instance had committed a felony with that view, and the Go vernor thought it necessary to make an example in their case, in order to check such a spirit amongst the soldiery. They were sentenced by the Quarter Sessions to be transported for seven years, and the Governor commuted that sentence by ordering, as he was empowered by the Act of Legislative Council to do, that they should be employed at hard labour on the roads in the colony for that period, and that they should be compelled to work in irons. To render the example still more forcible and impres sive, he had them stript of their dress on parade in the presence of the regiment, and the irons then put on them. When Sadds returned to prison he be came ill, and his irons were in consequence after wards removed. It was said th at he had been ill before they were put on, but he was not on the sick list, and if lie had been affected with previous illness the Governor was not acquainted with it. He was 'removed from the gaol to the hospital in conse quence of his illness, arid that was made a matter of charge by those who wished to place the Go vernor's conduct in the worst point of view, as if he was removed there to prevent an inquest from being held upon him, but he had been only removed to the hosp i tal in conformity with the usual practice in cases of the kind. His death had been imputed to the irons which had been put upon him. He (Sir George Murray) would read an extract from the Australian newspaper, in refutation of that charge. That paper having advanced that charge in the first instance, and having spoken of the great weight of the irons, &c. the next day the editor, in an article referring to a letter from Mr. M'Leay, which he published in reply to his statement, acknowledged he had been in error in attributing to the Governor a departure in this instance from those feelings of humanity by which his conduct had been uniformly characterised; and he f urt h er s t a ted that he never meant to imput e to the Governor an intention of producing the death of this individual by the punish went that had been inflicted on him. In the letter which Mr. Wentworth had written to him (Sir G. Murray), he referred to a letter which he addressed 1 'o the Secretary of State in December, 1826, on the subject, and in which he stated that the case was one which called for the removal of General Darling, and yet he allowed it to remain unnoticed up to the date of his other letter in March, 1829. He (Sir George Murray) believed that very inflamed and exaggerated statements had been made with regard to this case. Mr. O'CONNELL thought that the condition of New South Wales ought to be immediately inquired into, especially as the Governor had taken every means in his power to prevent them from knowing any thing about it by completely muzzling the press. With respect to the conduct of General Darling in the case now specially brought under the notice of the House, lie had only to say, that in his opinion it was quite indefensible. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought that no objection would be made to this motion, if the Hon. Member for Beverley would only qualify it by using the words "such papers as may seem fit to the Colonial Secretary to produce." Mr. HUME observed, that it was important to the House to know who Mr. Wentworth, the ac cuser of General Darling, was. He was a barrister of great property in New South Wales, enjoying far more of the confidence of the colonists than their Governor-General Darling. All that Mr. Went worth wished was to have General Darling called home to be tried here for acts for which he could not g b e brought to trial in New South Wales.— Every body must see that, considering the charges which Ns ere hanging over General Darling's head, it was most extraordinary that he should persist in pursuing the press of that colony to destruction. — Within the last eight and forty hours there had ar rived in England New South Wales papers all edged with black, on account of the recent order of the Governor, rendering all persons liable to banishment who published any thing to his prejudice. It was curious to hear of banishment from 'New South Wales, to which colony we were accustomed to banish our malefactors. But so it was, General Darling had issued the order to which his Hon,. and Learned Friend bad alluded, and he now held in his hand a New South Wales paper arrayed in mourn ing, and containing an article entitled " The Death and Burial of the Press in New South Wales." The SOLICITOR-GENERAL expressed his regret that statements should have been made in that House reflecting on the character of General Dar ling, founded upon newspaper reports alone. Mr. JEPHSON said he was obliged to the Hon. Member who had brought the motion forward. In his opinion, one of the most important duties which the House had to perform was to watch over the conduct of the Colonial Governors. . Mr. STEW ART said that in compliance wit the suggestion which had been thrown out, be would alter his motion to the following form : " Copies or extracts of all papers received from General Darling relative to the transaction in quits- ion." Sir a MURRAY said that if the lion. Member would consent to withdraw the motion altogether, he could assure him he would take care to produce all the documents which were necessary upon the subject. Mr. STEWART then withdrew the motion. MERCHANT SEAMEN. Sir M. W. RIDLEY rose, pursuant to notice, to move for leave to being in a Bill to amend Acts (William HI., and 20 George 11., cap. 38,) relating to the merchant seamen's fund. The Hon. Baronet stated that the object of the Bill was to relieve mer chant-seamen from the payment of 6d. per month out of their wages for the support of Greenwich Hospital, which they were compelled to make under the existing law. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he felt it his duty to oppose the motion. It should not be supposed that merchant-seamen de lived no advantage from the contributions which they made to.. the Greenwich Hospital fund. The fact was that merchant-seamen who had contributed to the fund were entitled to admission to the hospital as in-pensioners, after a very short period of service in the royal navy, whereas a seaman who had not contributed could not obtain admission until he had been 14 years in his Majesty's service. He had no objection to have the whole qUestion considered, with a view to make any alteration which might upon inquiry be deemed expedient. Lord W. POWLETT thought that the Hon. Baronet should not press his motion at the present time. Mr. WARBURTON said that merchant-seamen were not entitled to the benefits of Greenwich Hos pital as merchant-seamen, but only when they en. tered the King's service. The expence of collect ing the money subscribed by the seamen amounted to about IS or 20 per cent., which operated as an additional reason with him for getting rid of the tax. Sir G. COCKBURN said that merchant-seamen who had served for only two months in the Royal navy were frequently admitted to Greenwich Hos pital. He much doubted whether the abolition of the subscription would be popular amongst mer chant-seamen. Sir M. W. RIDLEY said that he would for the present rest satisfied with the explanations which had been given. He would therefore withdraw his motion, reserving to himself the right of renewing it if he ould think proper. Tho motion was withdrawn. COURT OF CHANCERY. Sir C. WETHERELL would withdraw his no tice of motion for leave to bring in a Bill to restrain and regulate the powers of the Attorney-General in filing ex-officio informations, in order to allow the adjourned debate, respecting the appointment of a new Chancery Judge, to come on. Mr. BROUGHAM expressed his wish that the discussion respecting the. Court of Chancery might not be brought on at so late an hour (ten o'clock). There were many other questions which would ex cellently well occupy the attention of Members. Amongst the rest the Sale of Beer Bill.—(General cries of " Go on.")—lt was very easy to say " go on," but lie entered his protest against entering upon the discussion, and he was sure that it would be adjourned at two o'cicck. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he had postponed the order respecting the Sale of Beer Bill till Monday, for the express pur pose of allowing the adjourned debate to be brought on this evening. Sir C. WETHERELL asked whether it was the intention of Government to propose any alteration in the Bill which had come down from the House of Lords respecting the Court of Chancery ? Sir R. PEEL said that his Hon. and Learned Friend would make a general statement in explana tion of the measure ; but he believed there existed no intention of submitting any specific proposition on the subject. The Order of the Day was then read for THE ADJOURNED DEBATE Upon Sir C. WETHERELL'S motion " That it is the duty of this House, before it gives its sanction to the appointment of a further Judge in the Court of Chancery, to ascertain, by the examination of wit nesses and other inquiries, whether a case of neces sity exists for such an appointment," Mr. FERGUSSON began by stating that be should vote for the proposition of the Hon. and Learned Member for Plympton (Sir C. Wetherell), though he did not concur in a great part of what had fallen from him on a preceding evening, especi ally in respect to the motives which had induced the Noble and Learned in guestinni Lo in the therd other bring erun fo use. rw i a i r t he measure w a sle i c m o e n a y s i u n i c 'e ed the Noble and Learned Lord had no mo tive but a wish to relieve suitors, and that no per sonal consideration had swayed him. It was a mea sure that Ni o ul , l tend to the relief of the two other Judges in the Court of Chancery, but in respect to matters of appeal, which constituted the bulk of the business of the Lord Chancellor, the appointment of a new Judge could be of no service to him. ptit it was not sufficient that bare motives should exist, it should be shown that there was a necessity for an additional Judge, and sufficient evidence had not been laid before the House of Commons to justify them in sanctioning a measure which would lead to a considerable expense. The lion. and Learned Member for Plympton had rested his proposition on two grounds—the returns before the House, and the opinions of learned persons, including two of the Judges of the Court, that a fourth Judge was unnecessary. It appeared from the returns, that al though the arrears of business in Chancery had accumulated during three years, yet during four months such an effort had been made, that the ex isting Judges had been found sufficient for the des patch of business. In 1827, the number of cases was 576 ; in 1829 the number had increased to 928. But it appeared that from the first day of Hilary Term, 1829, to the first seal before Easter Term, that is one term and one sitting, the number of 928 had been reduced by the Judges to 655, so that the accumulation had decreased by 273 causes. Much of this diminution was to be attributed to the Mas ter of the Rolls having commenced sitting in the morning as the other Judges. In the Vice-Chan cellor's Court, the number of causes in Hilary Term was 466 ; the number now was 323, showing a reduction of 143. In the Rolls Court, the number in Hilary Term was 462; the number standing on the first seal of Easter Term was 332; making a reduction in the Master of the Rolls' paper of 130. If, then, the Court was able to reduce the an•, - rs within a reasonable time, be (Mr. Fergusson) ob jected to the erection of another Court of Equity. Till lie saw the statement, he had thought it per fectly impossible that it could have been done, and that it was absolutely necessary that there should be a fourth Judge in the Court of Chancery. He.was so convinced of this, that in February, 1828, he had given it is as his opinion that nothing could re duce the arrears of the Court, and enable it to despatch its business from day to day. The Hon. and Learned Member for Plympton had called to his support the testimony of the Master of the Rolls and the Vice-Chancellor. lie stated that the Mas ter of the Rolls was against the appointment of an additional Judge, and that the Vice-Chancellor did not think such appointment necessary. The evi dence of the latter Judge before the Chancery Corn mission was to a different effect; he then believed that three angels could not get through the busi ness. But the Vice-Chancellor had been in the same state that he (Mr. Fergusson) was. Mr. Bickersteth and Mr. Bell also thought a fourtk Judge necessary. But Mr. Bell had changed his opinion as well as he had, in a publication which he held in his hand. Then if the Vice-Chancellor and Mr. Bell, who were at one time of opinion that a fourth Judge was necessary, had in the course of five years changed that opinion, owing to a change of circumstances, this was a strong argument against the measure. He spoke not as a professional man, but as a Member of the House, when be said this measure was unnecessary. It must be a subject of great surprise to a foreign lawyer to mark the con stitution of our Court of Appeal in the last resort : one day the Lord Chancellor was assisted by an Irish Bishop and a Scotch Lord, next day by two men of fashion from St. James's. It had been said that there were very few appeals to the House of Lords. Why should appeals go there ? Where was the use of appeals from the Lord Chancellor in his Court to the Lord Chancellor in the House of Lords ? When a person had in public committed himself in a point of law, it was a mockery:to call it a Court where that person sat in a Court of Appeal. The mode of deciding Scotch appeals required some alteration. A point of pure Scotch law was decided by a person who had not made that law his study, and not one of the 400 Judges in the House of Lords knew more than the Lord Chancellor about it. He trusted that this system would be altered; that persons versed in Scotch law would form a part of the court of appeal in Scotch cases; and then we should not see the unanimous decision of the Court of Session reversed by a Lord Chancellor. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then adverted to the present constitution of the Privy Council, where he observed causes in volving property to an incalculable amount, and belonging to 100,000,000 of subjects of the realm, were heard and decided—sometimes, it was true. under the presidency of a Learned Judge, but more frequently by men who knew little or nothing of law ; and even where a Judge of one of the equity courts presided, there were causes arising out of colonial appeals, and depending upon the interpre tation of the laws of other countries, with which he could not be practically acquainted. But many im portant causes were heard before the Chief Judge of the Admiralty Court, and a lay Lord of the Admi ralty,—an Hon. Friend of his, and a most excellent man, but certainly not qualified to sit as a Judge in such causes. The whole of that system was bad, and ought to be changed. He would suggest that there should be a high court of appeal, consisting of the chief Judges of the higher courts, with whom there should be associated—as was done in France, from which we might take many useful lessons in our system of jurisprudence—persons who were practically conversant with the laws prevailing in our colonies. In order to this, the Lords should give up their appellate jurisdiction, which, as was said by Lord Hale, and was echoed by many of his commentators, was an usurped jurisdiction. Such a measure could of course originate only with them selves, and in the present troublesome mode of con ducting the business of appeals in that House he thought it would be considered no great sacrifice. He begged pardon for this digression; but he was led to it by what had fallen from the Solicitor-General of having an appeal from the decision of any of the Judges in the Court of Chancery —the appeal to lie, should there be three Judges, to the Lord Chancellor and two of those Judges ; but he would not give an appeal to the other Judges from the Lord Chancellor. With respect to the Vice-Chan cellor, he would have him, as well as the other Judges, completely independent. As to the Master of the Rolls, he could not now give the same atten tion to the Privy Council as before, as he now held his court in the day ; but if he devoted his whole time to his own Court, he would soon get rid of much of the arrears. He owned that, looking at the state of the business, he had at first thought a fourth Judge necessary ; but, on consideration, he thought it might be done with the present number, If, however, at the end of another year, the arrears should be found to increase, he would not object to the addition now proposed. Mr. 11. TWISS said, that, at the commence ment of the present century, it was the opinion of the Learned Lord who then presided ofkr the Court of Chancery, that the business of the Court re quired additional assistance. This was before the Union with Ireland, and at a time when there were few appeals from the Lord Chancellor, few from the Court of Exchequer, and very few from the Courts of Common Law ; but soon after the Union with Ireland the appeals were doubled, arid they were farther increased by the division of the Court of Session in Scotland. And it should not be omit ted, that every Irish appeal was, from the complex nature of the cases, equal in length to nearly twenty appeals from other parts of the kingdom. The business had also greatly increased from the time of the appointment of the Vice-Chancel lor, as would be seen from the state of business in the three years before, as compared with that in the three years following his appointment. In the former period the number of causes and motions of all kinds was 4,021 ; in the latter it was 5,699; being an increase of nearly 1,700 in that time. But there was a greater despatch and a greater increase of business. In the years 1814, 1815, and 1816, the number of motions for hearing before the Lord Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor, and Master of the Rolls, was 2,478. In the three last years, exclu sively of bankrupt and binacy petitions, the number was 3,589, being nearly au increase of one-half. The bankrupt petitions were, in the former period, 2,323; and in the latter, 3,183; being an increase of one-third. The appeals to the House of Lords, in the same periods, were 124 in the former, and 202 in the latter. In die beginning of Hilary Term the arrear was 928, which at the end of Easter Term was reduced by nearly one-third, the number being 655. But it was not a new thing to have the arrear reduced from January to Easter Term, be cause between those periods the Court sat with less interruption than at any other period of the year. In the preceding year the arrears had been reduced to 558 at Easter Term ; but at the end of the year they had increased to 815—and rose, as he bad said, to 928 in the beginning of the present year. This made against the allegations of his Hon. Friend, and showed the necessity of the appointment of a new Judge. The great importance of the business of Chancery at present might be judged from the im mense increase of the funds belonging to suitors in the Court. In 1740, the money standing in the name of suitors was only 1,290,0001. In 1820, it was 34 or 35,000,0001., and at present it was nearly 40,000,0001. Let it also be recollected that the ave rage ages of the Judges in the Court cannot be less than 60 years, and some provision should be made for those delays which might be occasioned by sickness, for even with four Judges they could not always calculate upon the attendance of the whole. It was seen at present that the delay in the Rolls' Court before a case entered came for hearing was three terms. In the Vice-Chancellor's Court it was six terms. Now, taking the general average of cases, there were three hearings of each before the final decision. First, the hearing when the cause came on, then a reference to the Master, and afterwards a hearing on the Master's report. Taking a year and a half as the average time between each hearing, as they must come on in turn, it would take four years and a half for each cause, from the time of entering it until its decision. There were many circumstances of " the law's delay" which would protract a cause, and over which no legislative controul could be ex ercised; but such a delay as four years and a half would be a delay of justice for which Parliament would be responsible if it did not endeavour to apply some remedy by giving additional assistance to the Court. Mr. SPENCE expressed great doubts as to the good effects which would result from the adoption of the measure now submitted to the House. It was, in his opinion, most injudicious to allow the Bill more immediately before the House to get so much the start of the other two, for the regulation of the Registrars and Masters, when the nature of the subject required that they should proceed in all their stages together. Besides, the regulations in these Bills were in themselves of a kind calculated to retard, in place of advancing, public business; and for this reason—the Registrars were bow fre quently obliged to work 14 hours a day in order to get through the business before them, and they were induced to make this exertion, because the more they passed the greater would be their emolu ments; but once they were put upon salaries they would of course work only during eflice hours. if all that the Registrar had to do was to embody the order of the Court without going into a recital of the pleadings, he should be disposed to say that the Bill proposed would facilitate the performance of ten times the quantity of business now transacted ; but there was no provision whatever for altering the evil to which he alluded. if that were re moved, he should hail the measure as a considerable improvement.—(" Hear," from the Solicitor-Gene ral.) —He was gratified to perceive, by the cheer of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that it was in tended to obviate this objection. Both the Re gistrars and Masters were at present inefficient, and he hoped to see them so regulated as to leave no legitimate cause for complaint. He trusted that they should not again find by the returns that 925/. had been paid for the sale of one estate.—(Hear.) If no fees were taken for copies, he conceived that such an alteration would materially expedite the dis posal of business. He would likewise recommend that the business which was now sent to the clerk should go to a responsible officer, and he had reason to believe that many of the clerksl were very com petent to the performance of the higher duty. If such changes were made, he should have pleasure in supporting the Hon. and Learned Gentleman at the sacrifice of sundry minor considerations. Mr. BATLEY had consulted the most eminent practitioners, both barristers and solicitors, and they were all of opinion that another Equity Judge was not necessary. The Hon. Member quoted the opinions expressed by Sir Samuel Ronsilly and the present Master of the Rolls on the Bill of 1813, and said that he agreed with these authorities that the Lord Chancellor ought not to be a political cha racter. Nothing could be more improper than to take away the Lord Chancellor from the duties of his Court to attend Cabinet Councils. When Lord Hardwicke was called to Cabinet Councils, he an answered that he had important business to attend to in Westminster Hall. Lord Eldon, whose like as a Judge he never expected to see again, did not at first attend Cabinet Councils. After Mr. Per ceval's death Lord Eldon constantly attended Ca binet Councils; and from that time it was evident that, when in Court, that able Judge's mind was fixed upon something else, and that he was not at tending to the arguments submitted to him by Coun sel.—(Hear, and laughter.)—His Lordship, like a conscientious man, said, " I will take the papers home with me, and give judgment at the first con venient opportunity ; ' but political cases pressed upon his Lordship, and that convenient time never carne.—(Hear, and much laughter.)—He believed that no man of the profession unconnected with office, would say that another Equity Judge was necessary, and he should therefore vote for the mo tion of the Hon. Member for Plympton. Mr. R. GRANT said that this was a subject of very great import, and that many Hon. Members yet remained to be heard upon it. It was impossible the discussion could be concluded that night, and lie should therefore move that the debate be now adjourned. Mr. BROUGHAM entirely concurred in the propriety of that motion. If they had done as he took the liberty of suggesting they ought to have done, at ten o'clock, he thought they would have found it more convenient. Allow him also to ob serve, that if, when they resumed the discussion, they should bring it on at so late an hour as they had to-night, they must again adjourn it. He really wished that, to-night, they had taken a little beer— (Hear, and laughter) 7 -instead of this. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR 'hoped that a convenient day would be fixed, and that the discussion would be brought on at an early hour. Sir R. PEEL said, that every body, he would venture to say, expected that the discussion would have come on to-night at an early hour. Who could have expected that the early part of the evening would have been occupied as it had been ? In dis cussing the question concerning the real property of Jews,—a case of a parish vestry,—and a motion for papers respecting New South Wales, a motion, be it eemembered, that was not resisted,—they had spent the whole of the evening. In those three subjects might he included all their business of that day. If gentlemen would make lengthy speeches upon subjects which did not call for them, And if they would prefer their own notices to public busi ness, however important, the same state of things must continue, and they should go on in the same course day after day. He really did not know what day to fix for the adjourned debate on this question, unless they took Wednesday—(Cries of " N0,n0,") —which he was reluctant to do, but he saw no alter native. Mr. BROUGHAM (after looking over the no tice-book) thought that by some arrangement be tween this and Tuesday, they might be able to bring on the discussion early on that day. There were obvious reasons, to which it would not be regular to allude, why they should not fix upon Wednesday. The debate was then adjourned till Tuesday next. The Bankers' (Ireland) Bill was read a third time, and passed. • The Witnesses' (Ireland) Bill was read a second time; to be read a third time on Monday. COMMON LAW FEES' BILL. On the motion of Sir R, PEEL, this Bill went through a Committee ; report received ; Bill to be read a third time on Monday next, and to be printed. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at One o'clock. ST OF THE MINORITY VOTED FOR REFERRING THE PETITION FROM LUKE, ♦GAINST THE CONDUCE' OF THE COM THE BUILDING OF CHURCHES, TO A SELECT OF FOURTEEN, WHO V THE PARISH OF ST. ' MISSIONERS FOR COMMITTEE. Brougham, James Marshall, J. Byng, George Macaulay, T. B. Harvey, D. W. O'Connell, D. Dawson, A. Phillips, Sir G. TELLRII. Jephson, C. D. Stewart, J. Hume, J oseph Monck, J. B. Taylor, M. A. Wood, John Waithman, Aid. [ Warburton, H. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF COMMONS. ORDERS OF THE DAY FOlt THIS DAY. Tithes Exchange Bill—Committee. Bankrupt Laws Bill—Committee. Embankments (Ireland)ll—Committee. Labouring Poor Bill—Further Consideration of Report. Poor's Rate Annuities Bill—Second Reading. Administration of Justice Bill—Further Consideration of Report. Charitable Institutions Bill—Committee. Justices of the Peace (Ireland) Bill—Committee. Arms (Ireland) Bill—Further Considera ion of Report. Stage Coach Propriebors Bill—Committee. Court of Session (Scotland) Bill—Further Consideration of Report. 12. Libel Law Amendment Bill—Committee. 13. Ways and Means—Committee. 14. Supply—Committee. 15. Local Jurisdiction Bill—Second Reading. 16. Dean Forest Bill—Further Consideration of Report. 17. Treasurer of the Navy Bill—Committee. 18. County Rates (Ireland) Bill—Further Consideration of Report. 19. Additional Churches Bill—Second Reading. 20. Assessed Taxes Composition Bill—Second Reading. NOTICICS OF MOTIONS FOR THIS DAY. 1. Colonel Davies—On Motion " That Mr. Speaker do leave the Chair," for the purpose of,going into the Committee of Supply, to move, That it is exped , ent that the Committee appointed to inquire into the regulations relating to Civil buperannuations, Half-pay, and Retired Allowances, do proceed with their Inquiry without loss of time. 2. Mr. George Dawson—Civil Contingencies, Commissariat, Army Extraordinaries. (In Committee of Supply.): 3. Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer—Miscellaneous Estimates. (In Committee of Supply.) 4. Mr. Lennard—To refer Civil Contingencies to a Select Com- mittee. 5. Mr. O'Connell—ln Committee ou Libel Law Amendment Bill, to move a Clause to allow defendants prosecuted for Libel to give in evidence the truth of allegations of fact, in order to negative criminal intention. G. Lord Viscount Morpeth—ln Committee on Libel Law Amend ment Bill, to move that the amount of recognizances and securities proposed to be raised by 1001. should be educed to the original sums. 7. The Lord Advocate—Bill for providing for a general system of Police in the Burghs of Scotland. 8. Mr. Lennard—On motion for the Committee of Supply, to move a Resolution for reduction of Salaries to the Ambas sadors. NOTICE GIVEN TESTIEDAT. Sir Charles Wetherell—Bill to restrain and regulate the Powers of the Attorney-General in filing Ex-figicio Infor mations. (Deferred till Thursday, June 24.) PARLIAMENTARY PAPER. NEWSPAPER STAMPS, AND ADVERTISE MENTS, IRELAND. An Account of the Sums actually received for Stamps for Newspapers, in Ireland, for the Four Months ending May 5, 1829, and May 5, 1830 ; also, an Account of the Sums received for Advertisement Duties during the same period. Four Months ending May 5. 1829. X. a. d. X. a. d. Stamps for Newspapers ll,lOO 19 7 9,603 910 Duties on Advertisements GEO. HARRISON, Comptroller of Accounts. Comptroller's Office, Stamps, Ireland, June 4, IS:P. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE. FRENCH PAPERS. " The Ministry has thought proper only to pub lish an extract of the report of Admiral Duperre. An :thermion of this kind in a piece of such import ance must certainly be found e d on reasons of public utility, which we shall respect; but whatever may have been the motives of the Ministry for altering the only official .document that has been published on the state of our fleet since it left Toulon, it has not found it possible to conceal from men of reflec tion the general tone of despondency which reigns in this relation made by one of the bravest and most able seamen which France can boast of. The follow ing fact justifies but too well the woful forebodings that appear to haunt the mind of the brave Admiral. Only a few days ago the journal of one of the vessels stationed for the last two years before Algiers was asked for, that it might be consulted. The result was, that from that period the wind required to ap proach the coast of Algiers has never blown for more than five days together, whilst twenty at least are necessary for the landing of the army and the materials for the campaign. The revelation of such a fact shows better than whole columns of argumen tation the unskilfulness of the men, who, in a fit of madness, and to satisfy their inordinate vanity and ambition, have thrown away the treasures and the most precious blood of France on the coast of Africa.—Temps. " The Gazette de France makes the following observations upon the Royal Proclamation :- 4 The Proclamation rectifies the entire electoral question as the King's reply to the address characterised the Parliamentary question. Thus, then, in spite of the combined efforts of the revolution and the defec tion to distort these as well as all other questions in order to draw the people into an attempt against their institutions, no doubt will remain as to the principles of the present Government—principles that are acknowledged by men of all parties. Royalty itself has fixed the sense of all that divided us. The foundation of our institutions is the Monarchy, and it is against this basis that all the efforts of a faction are directed.' " The Messager des Chambres has the following upon the same subject We acknowledge that this official document bears no longer, thank God, that significant and threatening originality which some madmen were disposed to impute to it. We find in it a repetition of the same sentiments against the late Chamber : we see in it the opinions of the Ministry of the Bth of August, with their misappre hension of the'intentions of that body, and conse quently with the same dissatisfaction. But, setting aside this temper of mind, which can never change till a more intimate acquaintance with the country has been formed, the proclamation is a new engage ment to abide by the charter, rather than make a rupture with it, and this, in our eyes, is a victory gained by public opinion,which was found too strong to be affronted by new menaces. As to the list of Presidents of Colleges, it is just what we expected ; it is formed almost entirely in the Ministerial inte rest—that is to say, composed of candidates whose votes may be' reckoned upon in the Chamber., By far the greater part of the Presidents-of the depart. mental College are Peers of France, and who, con• sequently, to whatever party they may be attached, are to be relied on for the honour and integrity 'of their conduct at the elections.' "At length our wishes are fulfilled. Charles X. I has spoken—and has spoken as a King and a father. What a striking combination of dignity, franknesgf and benevolence ! It is indeed our King who ad dresses us, for every word is stamped with the feel ings of his heart. His language is worthy of the Ruler of the State, the King and Guardian of 0 great nation. There now can be no excuse for error —no pretext for inditTerence. The King has tia furled his standard. Here is the rallying point of honour and duty, and every where else there 10 treasom and revolt. What royalist can hesitate to answer the summons of his beloved King ? and when the good are animated with a new zeal, 8 secret shame (may it be that of repentance) will arrest and disperse the bad. Victory cannot but be on our side.—Drapeau Blanc. " The King has spoken, and his language, 0 usual, possesses that character of dignity and autho rity which suffices to put down the factious, and confound their audacity. The language is calculated to enlighten the nation. The King himself points' out the hostile faction;. Let the people listen to this sovereign voice. The eye of the King is fixed upon every public want, and upon every danger' The factious treipass upon his authority under the pretence of the Charter ; the Charter itself stando greatly in need of the King's authority. For what would become of the Charter, our liberty, our pri' vileges, ourselves, without the King ? Let us con' gratulate royalty on the firmness which it displays it' %en' al ni Royal at brutal (lc Preserve able rail anarchy, presents sound oi terest is of Franc Inagistra '"-Quoth " The Mews of so repetv answer I May 19, more ele June 13 gu age of hination fleas ! 1 address ally, w h ever ma he decl express moved 1 ful chi wounde rebellioi to his a exhorts rnajorit: tween intentio p molt 6 6 Fa to de( chosen motion one thi ters ha elamati caused within who a jority i This a siti2n, are wii the me threat( able re elector can be rnent ( that r( ingly. of the dents. and it their c Lieut ( Count tore. hav e they 1 elector mente ,c N form Merits act, cc a state ing th the C lignac have i Minis GUM idea hiculc E/aine on of CORICI the by th and d in he to vo the q clams pomp of a with( de Pi It cal for hi these tern: no in ceive tram ] keep shoo' This that lot c it, is docu