The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-10 00:00:00

tb ( e, that tire principle of the ancient law was, that justice was not beneficially administered by moving Courts. With reference to the Courts in Ireland a wide mark of distinction was to be drawn as between them and the superior Courts here. He maintained that the re moving of the Judges from the collisions to which they were subject in Westminster Hall would lead to their becoming incompetent to the office of Judges, from the absence of that excitement which was necessary to the keeping up of their acquirements and knowledge of the law; and in confirmation of this fact the Noble and Learned Lord proceeded to read an extract from a work of great cele brity, with which the Learned Lord now a Member o his Majesty's Government was connected, and to which the Noble and Learned Lord too had himself (unless he was much belied) from time to time contributed. (The passage was then read by the Noble Lord from tl e Edinburgh Review to the effect that when a barrister was removed to the office of a Judge he became unfit for the office and lost his powers.) After some further observa tions, the Noble and Learned Lord observed that in the appointment of the Judges of the superior Courts in Westminster Hall there was little room for even the ails picion of partiality. They had great duties to perform, their appointment was scrutinised by the eye of a vigilant power, and no person would dare to wield his functions improperly But would it be so with these provincial establishments ? What had not been urged against the 4h Judges but that, the very nature of their appoint tea nts would give rise to mere Parliamentary jobbing ? It had keen raid that it was monstrous to go into the superior Courts cf Justice to recover small debts. He did not dispute it ; but let them see what was the case ; let their Lot dships consider the whole subject; let there not take a partial view of it. One of the great object, of the law was the prevention of litigation, and that the law should be so preci-e that men should know their rights ; and he would take upcn himself to say that any man who bad been a witness to the working of the sy-tem of this country must admit that it was transcen dently superior to that of every other country. A man who went to his counsel knew what were his rights almost to &certainty. except in complicated and rare in stances ; and, therefore, to consider the system as one which must be radically had because it was expensive was, in his mind, to come to an unphilosophical and un just conclusion. Since he had last addressed their Loud ships he hail found a fact related by Professor Park, in Which he stated that a gentleman at the bar, Mr. Preston, had, in the course of 30 years' experience, given 40,000 opinions, and that not one in 30 of those opinions had ever been made the subject of petition or appeal. Hi- Noble and Learned Friend's case lay entirely in a fallacy, and the fallacy was that persons could appeal in oeen and bread cases of error ; but it was in the delicate and minute cases mixed up of law and fact in which the mischief lay, and in which appeals were most necessary. No appeal under this Bill could reach this difficulty. His Noble aim Learned Friend in speaking of the ancient Local Courts had said that they admitted of appeals to the supe rior Courts of Westminster-hal:, by writs of false iudg went ; but this bad been found insufficient, and therefore were they to be abolished and a new system established. He had asked him (Lord Lyndhurst) whether he would hive his assent to any alteration of the law with respect to the recovery of debts or a small amount. To this he an swered that no person could be more anxious than himself to effect that object. He Ltd co-operated in the other House of Parliament with his Noble and Learned Friend to effect this object, and he should be most happy to co operate with him for the same object now, and if he embarked with his Noble and Learned Friend in such a course,he could only say that he should be found to pursue it with fairness and zeal. With respect to Ireland, the each-tine jurisdiction was as different from that to be found in the present Bill as it was possible for one thing to be different from another. In the Irish Courts the twenty pounds applied only to debts evinced by bonds, bills, and notes, and in all other cases the jurisdiction fell greatly below that sum. With respect to personal torts there was no retreat beyond the Bill. In Ireland, so great had been the inconvenience in the Assistant Barrister.' Courts, front the circumstance of the assistant barristers going the same circuit in which their courts were established, that at last they were not allowed to go repeatedly into tire same counties. No man who had studied the history of his country could be ignorant that in all times of difficulties the bar had been foremost in showing itself the most de cided opponents of oppression, and never did a poor indi vidual stand in need of assistance that be did not find a voluntary advocate in that branch of the legal profession. —(Hear, heir.) The r ffect of the present measure would he to destroy all such conduct. His Learned and Vene rable Friend on the floor of the House (Lord Eldon), who was so many years the ornament of his profession, his Noble Friend on the opposite benches, and his Learned Friend near 'him (Lord Wynford), had opposed this mea sure ; and when his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack recollected that his rivals, his opponents, and his successful competitors who still remained at the bar had likewise opposed it, he could not consider that he (Lord Lyndhurst) was prestrowuous or disrespectful to him in offering it his opposition. He should receive from him his weed of praise as far as his humble powers en abled him to express hiosself, but yet he must confess that he disapproved of the system of detaching the law pro ceedings from the courts in Westminster Hall.----(Hear, hear.) His Noble and Learned Friend miscalculated the effect of the measure ; for, according to the returns which he had received from several circuits which he had gone iu the last two ytars, these Local Courts would take more than one-half of the ordinary busi ness from the circuits: He would likewise refer to the Report of the Law Commissioners which was on their Lordships' table, which stated that one half of the Circuit business would he transfi rred to the Local Courts. This was not all; for there would be a necessity to detach a number of professional counsel to attend specially these Local Courts ; and the general effects on the Bar might be easily ascertained. To another branch of the profession, the attorneys, the Bill would be perfectly destructive. The object of the Bill professed to be that law should be administered to the people on the cheapest possible scale. His Noble and Learned Friend, however, had not affixed to this Bill any table or schedule of fees. He had pressed him over and over again on the subject, and he wl4 told that it was the main point of difficulty. He (Lord Lynd hurst) had looked to his Noble Friend's scale ce fees at tached to his former Bill, and all lie could say was, that, if any similar scale were to be adopted now, the result would he that no man of any education or respectability would attend to transact business in the Local Courts, and they would be left to the lowest practitioners of the law.-- (Hear, hear, hear.) He had taken occasion on a former night to state what had been the effect of establishing a similar system in another country. He had alluded to America, and he would now refer to France. An eminent author of the highest authority - in the latter country, having described the bad effects of the system in the strongest terms, concluded by saying " never had tile French people a less respectable Magistracy ; little law was studied, and before such Judges the science would be rather prejudicial than useful. Learning was altogether as rare at the Bar as at the Bench, and the object of Counsel was to conciliate the Judge despite the e ', science of the law." Judge Hall had been an advocate for the establishment of small debt Courts, upon a certain plan, and to the limited amount of 5/. ; but he had added that the greatest danger imaginable in establishing the small d e bt Courts was that they might lead to the erection of country judicatures contravening law, and producing the most pernicious system imagina ble : the five pounds might in time be raised to 501., and the Courts in Westminster Hail be destroyed. It had been said by his Noble Friend who had commenced this debate that this Bill had been properly called the Poor Man's Bill. Not a morning did lie sit down to his break fast that be did not find the same doctrine held in a cer tain document which it was not necessary for him to men tion.—(A laugh.) In fac , , there never was a Bill lirao the poor man's Bill than the present measure. It would en. able the man possessed of property to obtain judetnent ate! execution, and to seize the property of the poor man, to sell it, and turn him into the street, in the course tf six weeks.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It was a Bill to op press the poor, • and to put the pow debtor en. irely at , the mercy of the rich creditor. Sir John Cross had been e xamined by the commissi oners w i t h respect to this Bill, and had stated that its effect would be to enable the creditor to seize his debtor's property ill ex ecution directly payment was withheld. This wi , ness had stated that where great facilities were given tc the poor to contract debts,' shopkeepers allowed them to run till ac counts to a certain point, and then perhaps took out, to one day, from twenty fo thirty summonses against their e us towers. This was a class of cases that grew up from the existence of the small courts. But would the poor be witnesses in these courts ? No; the witnesses would be the tradesmen, shopkeepers, and hankers. One per son priiclaimed that nothing could be more horrible than the existing law between debtor and creditor, and that the creditor ought to have full power over his debtor ; another pereon declared that there never had been a s y y tern so abominable as that of the Inaolvent Act that had been passed of late years; but let persons take what view of the subject they liked, be thought few would agree to call the present Bill the Poor Man's Bill. He would now direct the attention of - their Lordships to the provi ,io" of the Bill, anerely observing that it was the re sult of five years of study, which his Noble Fri rel On the Woolsack had given to the subject. He would say 1 nothing about the 201., but the Bill would absorb al cases of a personal nature, and every case of a personal tort would he taken from the superior courts, for where damages were uncertain and dependent on the will and humour of a jury, no man would venture to bring his action in a superior court on the chance of recovering more than this sum and obtaining a judges's certificate. He had looked at the cases of personal tort and those below 501., and they exceeded the others in the pro. portion of twelve or fourteen to one ; and the effect of this Bill would he to take the whole of such cases out of the superior courts, and to transfer them to the local courts in small districts, in which, before the day of trial, the whole of the cases would be discussed by those who had afterwards to decide upon them. The Bill allowe I that the defendant might remove the cause into a higher Court ; but on what terms ? Only upon his giving se curity for the damages and costs. The wealthy man might give security, but the poor man could not ; and yet this was to be called the poor man's Bill. Was the House to be taunted, and were their Lordships to be supposed, that they were so destitute of understanding as to think that the provisions of the Bill were in favour of the poor ? His Noble and Learned Friend had said that the Bill followed closely the report of the Commissioners; but the fact was the very reverse, for the extent of the recommendation of the Commissioners was only 201., and the Bill carried the amount to 59/., and the Noble Lord's former Bill carried the jurisdiction to 1001., which would take twenty-nine out of thirty parts of the business of the superior Courts. A man might go into a superior Court with a just demand, but by some accident, such as the absence of a witness, he might not recover his full sum, and yet by this Bill he would be mulcted of his whole costs. He could recollect cases of great import. ance in which the sums recovered did not exceed a few pounds. Questions of assurance or of accounts might be tried involving principle anti points of considerable im portance between merchants, and yet the sum in dispute might be only ten pounds, and could it be tolerated that such cases were to be tried in Local Courts ? The Bill in fact deviated entirely from the recommendation of the Commissioners. And now with respect to the venue. His Noble Friend selected the residence of the defendant, provided one of the plaintiffs resided in the same dis trict, as the locality of trying the action ; but the parties might probably live at the extremities of the kingdom, and still, under this cheap system, the witnesses were to be removed to the place of trial. After his Nale and} Learned Friend bad spent five years of his life on this 13,11, their Lordships were to be told that they must adopt it as a specimen of sound legislation. No provision for a new trial was made except where any mistake Was made in a point of law, or where the party had not been personally served with process. Every man who knew any thing of Courts of Justice knew that juries, from pre judices, partialities, or private feeling, often gave verdicts contrary to evidence, and in opposition to the advice of the Judges. The Court under this Bill might be sensible of this and yet unable to afford redress. An action might be brought against a man for scandal, the information tried, the defendant might justify arid acknowledge the slander, and declare that what he had said was true. The jury might find for the defendant contrary to evidence and contrary to the charge of the Judge, and the stain of in famy might he fixed on an honest man without any power of reversing the proceeding.—(Hear.) Suppose a case of debt to occur between parties residing at Liverpool and in the metropolis. Was either party to bring his witnesses that distance on a dispute of 101. ? Would not this amount to an intolerable vexation? He had been in. formed that it was the Noble Lord's intention to abandon the nineteenth clause; but this did not appear to be the case, and the principle of the Jury was to he got rid of as a troublesome and cumbrous piece of machi nery. Such was the plan emanating from the Whig party of the country. The more the number of the Jury was diminished, the more would the power of the Judge be increased. Was it right ha cases of importance involving property and character, that a Judge and only six Jurymen should have the exclusive jurisdiction without review except in cases of gross error ? This was only a sma I part of the evil. How were juries to be sum montd ?—(Hear, hear.) Mark the Bill in this respect. In all former cases the greatest caution was exercised in summoning a jury. The Judge was very properly allowed to have nothing to do with this. The jury was summoned by the Sheriff, and when the Judge came to try the case, he knew nothing of the jury. In the present Bill the pro vision on this point moat widely differed. Whom did the House suppose was intrusted with summoning the jury ? Why the Registrar, the travelling companion of the Judge.—(Cheers. 1 If the Judge were to summon the jury, he would at least be a responsible peason, but to let the jury be summoned by the irresponsible Registrar who travelled with the Judge, was something so nionstreas that he had no apprehensions that the House would accede to it; but, on the contrary, he was astonished that it ever could have been proposed. The jurymen were to be taken from the place moat convenient to the residence of the de fendant, and the poor man might go into the Court of Justice to get cheap justice as he could, but the rich man might avoid the trial by the neighbouring jury, provided he could only give security for the costs. Then it was provided that appeals should be allowed on the agreement of the Counsel of the contending parties, and that if they disagreed the Judge should decide. Why the Counsel were sure to disagree, and then the Judge was to settle a point which involved his own decision —(Hear.) His Learned Friend replied that this was now the case in West minster Hall; but in Westminster Hall there was a vigi lant enlightened bar, and other cheeks, and the pasties were not obliged to move for a new trial. A bill of ex. ceptions might be tendered, making the Judge state the law he had pronounced. There was no an ilogy between the established usage and the proposed Bill. He could point out many more objections, but the House might take what he had produced as a sample of the whole. Lord Somers had said that the business of a Reformer was to see that in correcting one disease he did not introduce some other evil, and that with the inconvenience to he re moved he did not remove some convenience which the former constitution bad provided. This was the true spirit of reform. After the description he had given of the Bill he asked if the House would t dee the course which was pressed upon it ? He had now discharged the duty he owed to their Lordships; he had discharged the duty he owed to himself and to the profession to which lie i had the honour to belong ; he had stated the reason why he should vote against the Bill. He had no personal enmity to answer, and no private motives whatever to gratify. In the decision of that House he should most cheerfully acquiesce, and he should now beg leave to declare his sentiments in favour of the amendment pro posed.—(Cheers.) Lord PLUNKETT could not egree with the sentiments expressed by the Noble and Learned Lord in the able, eloquent, and masterly speech which they had just heard. Their Lordships could not think that he was able to answer the Noble and Learned Lord, or to follow him through the great variety of matters on which he had enlarged. It neither suited his place nor the scope of his information to do so ; nor should he have addressed their Lordships, but for the direct appeal which had been made to him. A great proportion of the argument had been employed, not in the discussion of this particular Bill, nor on the question of the patronage of the Crown, hut on the general patronage of the Lord Chancellor. if that speech was applicable to the subject at all, it was appli cable rather in the way of objection to the office of Chan cellor than to the constitution of the Local Courts. Some observations bad also been made en the patronage of the Lord Chancellor as to judicial situations, and as to the Church. If he did not believe that those observations had been as sincere as he thought them mistaken, he should treat them very differently from the way in which he now meant to deal with them. Time Noble Lerd then alluded to the remarks made by the Noble and Learned Lord (Lyndhurst), on his (Lord Plunkett's) opposition to a Bill brought in by the Noble Lord opposite (Lord W yn f or d ) for the improvement of the practice in Courts of Justice. That Bill was totally different from the present, and its objects were d fferent. It went not to the establish ment of Local Courts, but to the improvement of the Cou r t s o f Westminster, and had been opposed by him because he thought it would interfere with the practice of those Courts without doing effectually the good intended. With regard to the Bill befort, their Lordships, it had been called anomalous, and objected to as interfering with the ancient practice of the kingdom. Ibat might be a good argini:_nt, if their Lord,hips, in legislating for the coun try, were to look not to the actual state of the country at present, and what it now required, but to its state at former periods of our history. He would, however, remind their Lordships, that the former state of the coun try rested on a system of local jwiimiturc,, and that the venerable system of the Courts of Westminster Hall, so highly lauded by the Noble Lord, and in the praises of which he (Lord Pluukett) joined, was an improvement on those Local Courts.—(llear, hear.) Did he (Lord P.) say, that our ancestors were wrong in making that change, or that they ought to h ave gone back to those local jurisdictions ? No; he said that those philosophical persons were right in making the change, and in not adhering to the old institution., w h en their use had passed away; and that they were entitled to suit them to the times in Whi c h they lived.—(Hear, hear.) But on the same prin ciple the present generation had a right to eking.: the courts of Westminster Hall, when they were no longer found suitable, as our ancestors had the right of iustit tying them. The Noble and Learned Lord had objected to the present Bill on two grounds—first, on principle; and, secondly, on authority. He (Lord Plunkett) would first address himself to the authorities quoted by the Noble and Learned Lord. He bad founded his argument on Mr. Justice Blackstone and Lord Hale. The Noble and Learned Lord would excuse him (Lord Plunkett) if he said that he had not treated this part of his case with his usual fairness, or with the candour with which he bad treated the rest of the case. The objections of both Blackstone and Hale were rot applicable to local jurisdic tions as established by this Bill, for they spoke of local jurisdictions as contrasted with the legal jurisdiction of the Courts of Westminster—and they gave the jurisdiction of the Courts of Westminster the preference to that of local courts. But neither Blackstone nor Lord Hale was opposed to local jurisdictions in small debts. The main objection brought by Blackstone to such a system, was that he did not approve of the permanent local residence of the Judges—(Hear, hear)—and he (Lord Plunkett) conceived that some improvement might be made in the present measure in that respect.—(Hear, Lear.) He was anxious to support this Bill, not from any personal object of his own, but merely from a sense of duty. He considered it as highly advantageous to that class which ought to be peculiarly the object of their Lordships' pro tection.—(Hear.) It was intended that the effect of this system should be tried is two or three places at first. He (Lord P.) could conceive that it might be advantageous that the Judges to be appointed to the Courts should not be stationary in the same place, but should occasionally change from one Court to another. That, however, was no objection to the Bill ; it was merely a matter of detail. He would apply the principle of this Bill to the present system in Ireland, and he begged the Noble and Learned Lord's attention to it. The object of the Bill was not merely to afford the poor man cheap relief, but to take away the jurisdiction of the Courts of Westminster in cer tain cases, and establish a jurisdiction free from the delays and expense to which litigants were at present exposed ; so that the plan embraced not only cheap but expeditious justice. Now what was the case in Ireland 2 The esta blishment of local jurisdictions in that country was much older than seemed to be supposed by some of their Lord. ships. The first Bill which introduced local jurisdictions into Ireland, was the Qd George 1., which passed in the year 1717. By that Bill the jurisdiction was taken from the Superior Courts and given to the Courts of Assize ; and the Courts of Assize were not bound by any of the forms followed in the Superior Courts. It continued in force, with very trifling variation, from the time it passed till the year 1796. In 1796 a change took place. It was stated in the preamble of the Bill of that year, that the jurisdiction of the Courts of Assize had been found burdensome, and that it was, therefore, to be taken from the Judges of the Court of Assize and given to the assistant barristers. But from 1796 till the year of the Reform Bill, no change had been made in the jurisdiction of the assistant barristers ; nor had there been a single complaint made on account of their being locally settled in the same place. At the time of the passing of the Reform Bill, however, it was said, that from the political excitement then existing, it might be desirable that the assistant barristers should be changed, and on that occasion a change took place. But that change had been made not on account of the failure of local jurisdictions, as stated by the Noble and Learned Lord, but on account of political excitement in the country. So far from the system failing i❑ Ireland, it had succeeded as far as experience in that country could go to establish a principle. The Noble and Learned Lord objected to the Bill, because it did not do justice to the poor man, and tended to degrade the character of the Bar. He (Lord Plunkett), could not think that the character of the Bar would be degraded by the quantity of business withdrao n, and he thought the Noble and Learned Lord's fears unfounded. In his (Lord Plunkett's) opinion, the Noble and Learned Lord appeared to labour under two errors. lie underrated the mischief of the present system, and he overrated the danger and extent of the plan by which it was proposed that those remedies should be got rid of. Had the Noble and Learned Lord read the Report of the Learned Commissioners on the state of the Common Law upon this head ? They stated, " The mischief arising from delay is particul irly felt in the great commercial districts at a distance from the metropolis. Where a cause of action arises previously to the Summer Assizes, but not at such an interval as_to admit of the cause being tried at those Assizes, a defendant is often able, at a small expense, to set his creditors at defiance for nine or ten months; the plaintiff cannot go to trial till the next Spring Assizes, nor obtain execution in the ordinary course before the following April. In other cases, the delay may amount to nine, eight, or seven months; and it may be stated, that on the average, judg ment cannot be obtained, through the medium of a trial at the Assizes in less than six months." He (Lord P.) would say that this was an unreasonable delay.—(Hear.) The Noble and Learned Lord had s iid that this was not the poor man's Bill. He (Lord Pluukett) said it was decidedly for the benefit of the poor man. By it, the poor man, who was a creditor, would not only be enabled to get his debt readily, and at little cost, but (as perhaps some of their Lordships were not aware) the poor man, who was a debtor, while his property was made available to the payment of his debts, his person could only be touched in the event of his proving contumacious. The report of the Commissioners showed the immense expense to which the poor man was exposed to obtain payment of his debt. They stated, " The average expense incurred by a plaintiff in prosecuting a suit to judgment and ex ecutio❑ cannot be estimated at less than 30/. ; that of the defendant at not less tha❑ 20/., independently of the costs of conveying and maintaining witnesses, which in a country cause constitute, with the expense of passing the record and of entering the cause for trial, the most considerable part of the costs. These are the more serious where the place where the assizes are held is situated at a considerable distance from the populous parts of the county. When a witness from Manchester or Liverpool is taken to the assizes at Lancaster, the costs of conveyance and maintenance do not average less than from 71. to 81. ; it therefore fre quently happens that the costs of a plaintiff, when three or four witnesses are necessary to make out his case, amount to at least 50/. or 601., but often, we believe, to a much larger sum." They went on to say--" The corn hined effects of delay and expense are necessarily very injurious to the interests of the creditor who sues for a debt to the amount of 201. or 30/., or even to a much larger amount. If he sue in the county court, the de fendant may remove the cause as of course, without entix :__ • . ing into a recognizance, into a superior court, where the plaintiff has to encounter as great an expense and greater delay than if he had suet: at first in the higher court. If he sue in the higher court, he cannot proceed to try the cause at the assizes without incurring the risk of extra costs to the amount of from 101. to 201. ; to these he is liable, even though he should succeed not only in obtain ing a verdict, but in levying execution. But the defen dant may, pending a litigatio❑ cf several months, have become bankrupt, insolvent, or have removed himself and his property beyond the reach of legal process ; other more pressing creditors, by successive arrests, may have swept away the whole of the property. In any of these cases, the creditor would not only lose his debt, but a much larger sum in costs. The very proba bility that a creditor will be debarred by the apprehension of trouble aad expense from prosecuting an acticn at law, affords an additional inducement to a fraudulent debtor to set his creditor at defiance; and thus, whilst the law offers to the creditor a mode of remedy which is often only delusive, it, in effect, encourages the debtor to make a vexatious and fraudulent resistance." And they said— " We think it probable that nearly one half of the causes tried at the assizes are for causes of action not exceeding 201. each, and that the expense of litigating them is equal to at least four times the aggregate amount actually reco vered." And they concluded that part of the report by saying—" Upo❑ the whole, it is our duty to represent to your Alajes:y that the inadequacy of the present Courts, in causes of action from 403. to at least 201. amounts al- most to a denial of justice; and that we believe the coni- . ... plaints made by numbers whose evidence is stated in the appendix to this report to be just, that creditors are, from want of sufficient means to obtain redress, obliged to abandon their just demands ; that debtors are, from the saute cause, tempted to a dishonest resistance, and that the result is great injury to public morals and to private rights." Was it to be said, then, that this Bill was not the poor man's friend ?—(Hear, hear.) They said in re ference to the amount to which the jurisdictions of the Courts should be limited—" We have been induced by se veral considerations (some of which have been already no ticed) to fix upon the sum of 201. as the limit to the ju risdiction of the Local Courts. That sum, taking into account the change in the value of money, is much less than 40s. was, when it was made the limit to the juris diction of the County Cour, the Hundred Court, and other inferior Courts in Engl siad.—(llear.) It is also the amount which has been fixed by the superior Courts as the limit below which a new trial will not usually be granted, when the costs are to be paid by the applicant; such cause of action being considered so trifling as not to war:ant the increased expenditure consequent upon a new trial. It is aloe the lowest sum for which a defendant can now be arrested. We have before observed, that it was the opinion of Lord Hale that the jurisdiction of the County Court should be raised to 101. ; a sum which, at that time, was equivalent to at least 201. of present money." But they bun also the opinion of Lord Hale himself. He said --" By the true and wise constitution of this kingdom, suits where the debt or damage amount not to 10s. were not to be determined in the Courts of Westminster, unless a title of land came in question, but they were to be deter mined in the County Court, Hundred Court, or Court Baron. And this was the ancient law ; vide Stat. Gin cest. 6E. I.* At that time, 40s. was a considerable sum; 1. In respect of the intrinsic value of the coin, for then 20d. made an ounce of silver, and at this day it is 55., viz., 60 pence, and upon that single account 40s. then arbeth now to 61. But 2. That was not all, for, as I may say, money was at that time dearer than it is now, because there WAS not so much, and hence it is that the prices of all things at this day are much dearer now than they were then, because money is much more plentiful now than it was then." Nor was this all, for he further said, "That it was the wise constitution of the common law to keep small suitors from the great Courts of Westminster."—(Hear, hear.) That was the opinion of Lord Hale, and so far from the opinion being in favour of the opinion of the Noble and Learned Lord, it was directly the reverse.—(Hear, hear.) And this appeared tobe the opinion of the Judges of the Courts of Westminster themselves, for they had decided, that where a case was for a sum less than 20/. they would allow no new trial, he the merits of the case what they might, and even if the parties themselves agreed to let the case go to a new trial. That showed that the Judges themselves did not think it proper to encourage small actions in superior Courts.—(Hear.) Even supposing, and allowing, thet these Local Courts should be established, still, inure than half the causes that might be tried in them avould, after all, be tried in West. minster Hall. He considered that the poor man's cha racter was as dear to him as the rich man's character, and he should be afforded every means of redressing that character when injured. It had been objected to the Bill that, in moving for a new writ of certiorari, the securities would he unlimited in their amount, and therefore the poor would not be benefited. Now the Bill obviated such an objection ; for it expressly provided that damages should be cut down to the amount of 501 , so that the security could never reach that sum. He would not delay their Lordships with any further remarks. His Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack had already gone into the merits of the measure, and would, no doubt, fully answer any remaining objections that might be made to it. Lord WYNFORD said that he was perfectly surprised that the Noble and Learned Lord who spoke last should be so inconsistent, without giving reasons for his incon sistency, as to support the present measure. when he objected to a measure of his (Lord Wynford's), thrown out last session, which contained a principle with respect to the examination of witnesses in the superior Courts, which was far less objectionable than the same principle, extended as it was, in the present Bill. Lord PLUNKETT said that he objected to the Noble and Learned Lord's treasure on two grounds. First, because the interrogatories established by it affected freehold property; and secondly, because Courts of Equity would not have a proper check on the decisions of other Courts. Lord WYNFORD—In considering this Bill, it would not only be necessary to look to the patronage that would accrue from it to the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack, but also to that obtained by a very different department of the Government. There was no danger that an improper use would he made of that patronage, but he should like to know how many applications had been lately made to the Noble arid Learned Lord in con sequence of this projected measure. (The Lord Chancellor intimated by gesture that none had been made.) The Noble and Learned Lord himself had on a former occasion owned that the patronage would be great, and that his mind laboured how to get rid of it. For his own part he objected to any new amount of patronage being conferred, no matter to whom it might be given. The patronage bestowed by the present measure would be great; it would extend to the appointment of some 30 or 40 judges, of as many registrars, and of a greater number of inferior officers. He was sure that this patronage, connected with the other patronage of the high office:E . the Noble and Learned Lord filled, would be inconsistent with the safety of the lives, property, and liberties of the public. In the pre amble of the Bill it was stated that the operations of the measure would be limited. It was said to he an experi ment ;as such pet haps he might not object to it. He even then said, very well, let it be tried in one or two counties with which he was connected.—(A laugh.) That was not found convenient to be done, and when he saw that his motion in the Committee to limit the Bill to two counties was lost, it was then he determined to vote against it. He thought that Parliament should he enabled to judge how the measure was likely to succeed before it could be tried on a grand scale. The plan would not be in operation three months before it would be found expen sive and impracticahle. I' should not be left to Ministers to inquire as to its efficiency ; the inquiry should be made by Parliament. Local Courts had been tried of yore, hut it was found then, and was ever found in modern times, that justice could not be administered in them. It was for that reason that Judges in Eyre were appointed to bring justice nearly to the point that it was intended to be brought by the present measure. All the evils atten elmt on the appointment of these Local Courts would be obviated if the two or three clauses he proposed in Com mittee had beets agreed to. Those clauses were to reduce the expenses of the higher Courts. Local Courts had been tried ; they existed in former periods, but fell into disuse. Local Courts existed in all the great towns of the kingdom. They existed in the metropolis. There were in it the Lord Mayor's Court, the She riff's and the Palace Courts, in which actions under 20/. might be tried. Yet, though the gates of those Courts stood gaping wide, no suitors could be tempted to enter scarcely, as was proved by the fact that 300 cases that might be tried in those Courts, were carried to the superior Courts. They were found to be expensive —that was the chief reason ; and he appeeled to the Noble and Learned Lord, if, by his Bill, the expense of the inferior Courts on the subject of witnesses, would not be as great, if not greater then they were at present in the other Courts. After rep'yiog to the argument of the Lord Chancellor on the subject of new trials in cases where the damages were under 20/., by saying that new trials were granted in all cases where there was any infor mality, lie concluded by calling the attention of the House to the little probability of there being a good bar, and of the great importance to the public and to the due aomini • stration of justice, that the respectability of the profession should be maintained ; that the Ecclesiastical Commission had gut rid of the Diocesan Courts ; and that, upon all those grounds, he into. support the amendment. The. LORD CHANCELLOR assured their Lordships that he rose under the influence of the greatest concern and anxiety—that anxiety o casioned, in the first place, by the vast importance of the subject to which he should have to address himself—an importance fully admitted on that as well as in every one of the preceding stages of the Bill—an importance felt no less within the walls of that House than without—he trusted, notwithstanding, that in the discussion of the Bill on their Lordships' table, and in considering the several questions to which it gave rise, he should not have recourse to any one of those topics, against the use of which his Noble and Learned Friend the Chief Baron of the Court of Exche , quer had issued his prohibition, and which, so far as he was concerned, had been wholly superfluous, at the same time that he was perfectly willing to acknowledge that the interest everywhere felt on the subject might afford the fairest temptation to depart from those rules in the conduct of this discussion, upon which his Noble and Learned Friend had so very properly insisted. In ad dressing himself to the observations made upon. the Bill by his Noble and Learned Friend, the late Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, he could very sincerely assure their Lordships of his intention to do so within as narrow a compass as the length of his speech, and his respect for the opinious and character of his Noble and Learned Friend would permit. If, however, his reply to the argument of his Noble and Learned Friend should prove longer than might be agreeable to their Lordships, he trusted that, under the peculiar circumstances in which he stood, that excess might be pardoned, and if not on that account, at least on account of the general interest which that Bill had excited. He re peated that he would endeavour to reply to his Noble and Learned Friend in as few observations as possible, and he hoped he would attribute his dealing with him briefly not to any want of personal respect. That bre vity he really felt imposed on him by the circumstance of his Noble and Learned Friend's labouring under so considerable a degree of ignorance upon the question which their Lordships had to consider-(Cheers and Litighter)—so peat was his misapprehension not only of the principle of the measure—not only of any of its provisions —not only of the grounds upon which it was introduced—not only of the arguments by which it was supported or assailed—not only of the very papers which he himself ILA made use of, but of the provisions of his own Bill—that it would only be necessary for him to trouble their Lordships with a vary few observations in deed, in order to dispose of all that had fallen from his Noble and Learned Friend. Wbe❑ he remembered, as he sad, the extraordirrary and incomprehensible ignorance of his Noble and Learned Friend, lie professed himself utterly unable to account for it, and for the strange h shlu cination under which he seemed to labour—otherwise than by coming to the conclusion that lie had not bestowed upon the present question that degree of attention which is his wont. He could not imagine bow his Noble and See Chap. 8. of the Statute. Learned Friend could become so struck with intellectual blindness, by nothing less than by assuming that lie was then deficient in that acute attention which he ordinarily bestowed upon the questions before their Lordships—for example, he said that the County Courts and Local Courts were every where to be found—that there was hardly a couaty, city, or great town, in which they were not to be found, and yet they were so little beneficial that no sui • tors were to be found—though their doors were gaping, suitors would not enter—they did not like the system. Within the limits, as it might be said, of the metrepolie, there were the Palace Court, the Lord Mayor's Court in London, and the Court of the Sheriff of Middlesex; and there are, as was well known, various Courts of a similar description elsewhere. Now it so happened that he held in his hand returns from the Steward of the Palace Court, who was appointed under his Noble Friend the Lord Stew ard, and from those returns it appeared that in 1832 there were tried in that Court no fewer than 921 causes. Lord 'WYNFORD—Was not that the number of writs issued ? The LOAD CHANCELLOR said he would presently favour his Noble and Learned Friend with the number of writs issued-921 was the number of the causes actually brought to trial in a single year. What did their Lord ships suppose was the actual number of writs?—only 7,100--(Great cheers and laughter)—only 7,100 in the P a l ace Gaut in one year, and those were the Local Courts of which his Noble and Learned Friend told them the doors were gaping wide, and that no suitors would enter. The Courts might be cheap—they might be at hand—but his Noble and Learned Friend averred to the House that suitors were not to be found, and the Palace Court did not try one-third part of the causes which, in point of fact, as appeared from the official return, it had tried. —(Renewed laughter.) Lord WV.NFORD—What I stated was, that in one year 300 causes were tried in the inferior Courts which might have been tried in the Palace Court. The LORD CHANCELLOR—But the argument of his Noble end Learned Friend was, that the people did not like the Local Courts.—(Loud cheers.) Would their Lordships permit him to call their attention to another Local Court within the limits of the metropolis—that over which his Learned Friend Sergeant Heath pre sided ?—(Hear, hear.) In that Court 9,000 causes were disposed of annually. In the Local Court at Liverpool, 9,000 or 10,000 causes were likewise disposed of an nually ; and at Manchester as many. He forgot which it was that disposed of the greater number ; but this he re -1 membered, and could prove, if necessary, that the Local Court at one of those towns disposed annually of 10,000, on an average; and that the other got rid of 20,000. Throughout the country there were many Courts of the same description, to which the suitors flocked, though his Noble and Learned Friend could not discern any—(A laugh) —and resisted the enactment of a measure, the object of which was to render universal Courts wh: never resorted to by all desiring cheap and speedy justice; and he should like to know the man who in his own case wished for a tartly and expensive administration of the law. He admitted that many of the courts of which he had been speaking were exceedingly imperfect ; but the object of the Bill was to amend them, and establish similar tribunals where none at present existed. Not withstanding, however, that so many of them were ill regulated, they were much resorted to, and had been productive of great individual benefit.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Their Lordships had already before them the most con clusive evidence that the evils which the Bill was in tended to remedy were wide spread, deep-rooted, and sorely felt ; that wherever such Courts existed they were the place of daily resort by the suitors of the neigh bourhood ; that they were resorted tc for their proxi mity and for their cheapness, and whatever might be the evils with which they were fraught, cheapness and proximity overcame them all, and the Courts were uni versally resorted to. Another instance which marked that inattention ou the part of his Noble and Leal ned Friend of which he had been speaking was, that he seemed to overlook the fact that the present measure had been submit. ted to the consideration of his other Noble and Learned Friend the Chief Baron, and the suggestions by him made in consequence of the Bill being so laid before him were sent to the Common Law Commissioners ; that the mea sure had been postponed for upwards of a year; that it had been investigated in its principles and its details—after a magi of evidence upon the subject—a great body of evi dence--after bestowing upan the measure the closest and the most minute attention—those Commissioners declared for the measure, the whole measure, and nothing but the measure. The Bill then before their Lordships was in all essential principles that of which the Commissioners had approved. The Commissioners had reported in favour of the princip'e of the Bill, but nevertheless his Noble end Learned Friend mullet see nothing of that in their report, though words could not be more express than were their declarations on the subject—yes, truly, the Bill before them went further than the recommendations of the Come missioners—on that point they were at issue before the House. His Noble and Learned Friend affirmed that the Bill went beyond the recommendation of the Commission, anti was not their Bill ; that lie denied. He was sure that the representation of the report of the Commission given before their Lordships was a representation, or rather misrepresentation, made by his Noble and Learned Friend in perfect innocence, and without the remotest suspicion of the truth. He felt perfectly assured that no political bias could lead his Noble and Learned Friend to do anything so utterly vain and silly, and so liable to detection and exposure, as the misrepresentation of the report to which he referred —(Cheers)—there could not he a more gross mistake; there could not be any statement more diametrically opposite to the truth, than to say that this Commission confined their recommendation to a Small Debts' Court. Let them only refer to the recommendation itself, which approved of the establishment of the local jurisdiction in all personal ac tions, where the demand did not exceed 201., provided it did not involve any question relating to the title of free hold, copyhold, tithes, or to titles under a commission of bankrupt. Now those exceptions of the Commissioners were the precise exceptions that he had made in his Bill. He had adopted the precise line that the Commissioners had advised; upon not one material point had he deviated from that advice. He would remind his Noble and Learned Friend—if reminding it could be called—to tell him of that which, perhaps, he never knew—(A laugh)— that there was the most perfect accordance between the Bill and the report, and that report was signed by a King's Counsel, Ly a Sergeant, by a Commissioner of Bankrupts, and by other persons of great learning and eminence in the profession ; and they had, to prevent any possibi• lity of doubt as to the interpretation to be put upon the words " personal actions," declared the precise sense in which those words were used ; and, to remove all un certainty, had given the precise form of pleading to be used, as well in actions of assault against the person, as in other cases of personal actions. Had his Noble and Learned Friend made himself as well acquainted with the other parts of the report as he had with the Appen- dix, he would have found that the whole was, as bad Leen already said, in perfect accordance with the Bill then on the table of the House. But then the House were to!d that those Local Courts might be allowed to try actions of trespass relating to goods, but that they should not be permitted to interfere with any thing involving those nice questions which arose out of personal actions. He would beg of Hs Noble and Learned Friend to turn swiftly over three pages of the report—from 24 to 27 and he would there find that the Commiesioners had re commended that in actions of slander the def&ndants should be allowed to plead in justification that the words spoken were true. Need he go further to show the ex traordinary and absurd degree of ignorance which seemed to affect the mind of his Noble and Learned Friend? And need be go further to establish the degree in which be was supported by the authority of that Learned Commission ? He valued much—he prized highly—and reluctantly should he permit any one to wrest from him the authority and sanction which his measure received from the support of the Commission; and he should lament the loss a that support and sanction the more, when he recollectk ;he known political bias of the distinguished individuals composing that Commission. Bias of a certain sort they unquestionably were under the influence of—for, in times like the present, who would be without political bias?-- and that bias, it was well known, was i❑ favour of ttio,e who opposed the Bid, and against the principles of his Majesty's Government. But his Noble and. Learned Friend teemed to forget all that. He seemed to forget even his own Bill, and the mode in which he conducted the discussion o❑ it—he seemed to forget how he had made the Bill tend to defeat its own purpose, and bow he had charged his Noble and Learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor of Ireland) with that of which his Noble and Learned Friend, anr, late Chief Justi of the Common Pleas, had himself been guilty. But no man who knew his Noble and Le :riled Friend would attribute to him any intentional misrepre sentation—he merely laboured under a complete forget fulness of the matters under consideration.—(Chetra and laughter.) He was now on his defence bd, te t h e 11 mi ,, and the country, against the accusation of his Noble and Learned Friend the Chief Baron, who had been so power fully seconded in the debate by the knowledge and thi accuracy of his Noble and Learned supporter, the late Chief Justice of Common Pleas, and for the purpo , e of repelling those accusations, he felt himself called upon to take to his aid the report of the Commissioners, who h d shown that they were alive puliticil bias—sustained b) such authority, it was no wonder that - he should feel Jealous at any attempt to wrest from him the 'l e authority upon which he leaned for support. He proceeded to explain the difference between the first 13 1 ' introduced and the present. He was aware that very specious objections might he urged against the I sure, and he did not underrate that which rested I the local prejudices of the Judges ; hut it was i n the in all similar cases, a choice of evils, arid he felt that benefits to be derived would greatly overbalance the e' There was no desirable measure so generally wise safe, upon the whole, that did not carry with it IV that might be objected to, but it was to he acceptedt. because it pretended to unmixed good, but as preset') a balance of advantage. The Noble and L ear ned I proceeded to show the analogy between his inef and the law relati ng to assistant barristers in ireae contending that the latter, who went their ei rc, six times in every year, would have as much cowl°, and intercourse with the inhabitant s as the District Jul of the Local Cou r t s . N o bl e Lords who had adverted the point, and especially his Noble and Learned Friend, Chief B iron, had omitted to state the principal arguif. in fav our o f t h e a b o li t i on o f the Welch judicature, el7ll, was not th a t th e J u d ges h a d i ntercourse with the i0"1, tants, but that one day they were practising a s Barrise and the next presiding on the Bench. On the su bjeel connection and intercourse, he begged to ask to ii 4l class of Judges it was most important to be free from fluence, from prejudice, and partiality—those who ° called upon to sit upon a cause relating to a d e bt of at the utmost, or those who had to decide upo n snipe the highest criminal offences, punishabl e with transP l lion for a number of years, or even for life ?_(He Yet the latter functions were exercised by Alagistrate 3 the country—whether acting singly or in pairs' threes and furs in Petty Sessions, or in greater 0 bers at Quarter Sessions. Yet this was, perhaps, roost cherished part of the law of England ; and 01 man in eith er H ouse o f Parliament, but above all in el, would dream of throwing out eves a suspicion that Magistrates of England were not only competent and imterested, but the most competent and most disinterei Judges that could be appointed ? These Magistrates nothing else but Local Judges—often exercising jul diction even in their parlour, arid , Siadies, a n d bay' nu jurisdiction nut of the district or county in sel , they resided.—(Hear,) They decided causes of 1 highest and deepest interest to their friends—to their' nants—or to those with whom they were upon term' political or parochial animosity. Their impartiality never impeached, and it was secured by two safeguards first, they seldom exercised superintendence of the Cots King's Bench : and secondly, and above all, the g tt . check and control of p u bli c Op i n i on. Neither did het' that improper appointments under the Bill would be 0 by Ministers ; the eyes of the public at this time we re! merely constantly glaring, but suspiciously frowning OF public men : and he must be absolutely insane who iO r now venture to job away his patronage; if he s v r willing to set character and consistency at defiance, must also be regardless of his political existence, an d el' of his personal safety, who would nominate a friend the purpose of promoting a political design. He pu t practically to the Noble and Learned Friends who bee him, whether there was a town in England where Judge would be called upon to exercise his functions which there was not a newspaper.--(Cheers and laughte r Seine of their Lordships seemed to he mighty merry atib mention of newspapers ; but be (the Lord Chancello r never knew a Judge who, however he might affect di° gard for newspapers, was not unwilling to expose birns t to the scrutiny of the pres.—(Cheers.) As long as the remained a jealous and watchful press, it would be as to possible for a local Judge to show the existence of priil motives, as for him to be influenced by that coil tion a century a n d a ha l f ago, had been tYI scandal of the judicial seat.—(lLear.) That they WI, be biassed by their feelings or their prejudices, believed to be utterly chimerical ; and the Local J o e would necessarily be a man of character and integrho ,' moving in a respect a bl e sp h ere, holding rank at the 17; and free from all associations inconeisterat with his dig nity. Besides, he would he frequently absent from t : town that might be called Ids head -quarters, and the s t, pointment would only be made in large, populous distric t. Before he said a word or two upon the point of p at r o nsg ° he must exp ress hi s surprise at the general nature of tel objections to the Bi I of his Noble Friend (Lord Whee o . cliffe), who, in the first instance, had so far co ncu rred the principle as to lend the Committee his aid in its de tails. Every a rgument h e had used against this mos°i, would apply to every Small Debt Bill that might b e intr o dueed; and when he talked of the influence upon, prejudices of Local Judges, it came from him, of all with the worst possibl e grace. He often acted as a LOC° Judge--11'S high rep :111,6w: en a Local Judge was kilUO, to every lawyer in Westminster Hall; and where had h e character for skill, knowledge, and impartiality be e formed ?, As Chairman of the Quarter Sessions in West Riding of Yorkshire, yet no local interest, no prieu° connexion, had cast t h e shadow of a shade over eb,i, brightness o f hi s j ud i cial career. His Noble Frien'' the Lord Chief Baron and the late Lord Chief Jus t e ied (Loud Wynforil) seemed t o f orget entirely that his Nob" and Learned Friend (for learned he might call him' after his great exp er i ence) was a Local Judge, nothing but a Local Judge, in the very county in whi c he lived, and which he represented inParliament t No men, howev e r, h a d ever ventured a whisper aga i n ! , his perfect impartiality, although a man entertaining ; strong politic a l o pi n i ons , an d — i t need be—as strong P e r, sonal animositi es , as any J u d ge on the Bench in Wes t' minster Hall.—(Cheers and l aug h ter .) Those; then, Vl b , - talked of th e p oss ibl e i mpur i ty o f the administration of tDe law by Local Judges, he answered out of the mouth of b ig Noble Friend, and by reference to his unsullied ex a mple.l (Hear.) He now came to t h e question of patronage ; M3l, recollecting that th e Bill was drawn up as long ago as Apr 1830, when his N o bl e and Learned Friend (Lord LY"''; burst) wes Chancellor, it was singular that it did not oa t ! to him that the patronage, such as it was, had been 011 1 ; ginally mea n t f or hi m and hi s fr i ends. Since then 11 1 (tie Lord Chancellor) had endeavoured to distribute among the Judges ; and, with all their sneers and taun° his Noble and Learned Friends could not on this score r g ; ' fu-e a scanty a nd meagre trib ute o f praise. Of taunts se e but he did complain o f the sneer:, misstatement th e did n t t i:fo facts. co tsm.pla li'n erhaps they th oug h t i t neces seer eme to attempt to enliven the deb ate , and had, therefore, 040; dried into the regions of pa re fi ct i on, without remember •' however, Chit ev en i nvention in some cases might as dull as fact. It was remarkable, however, that all e" e rrors were one w ay— i n their own favour, and agui°sl hiin.—(Bear.) Fo r i nstance, there was no part of tbl 811 which required four Judges for the West Riding ° Yorkshir e; and tie Noble and Learned Chief Baron wear, . to have g o t as i naccurate a v i ew of this measure as n: Noble and Learn e d E x -Chief Ju st i ce of the Commo n Plea t had taken of his own.—(Laughter.) Lord WYNFORD rose, am i d reiterate d cr i es °I: Order." H e said that he h a d submitted a long tin!! with patience; but he would not be held up to ridicule b y any man.—(Laughter, and cheers.) The LORD CHANCELLOR c onten d e d that his N u ble d and Learned Friend was ex cee di ng l y di sorderly. He has, spoken of inaccuracy in either reading or remet nberil a document: if his N o bl e an d L earned Friend ha d r e . it he hailt , P l forgotten it, or p oss ibl y h e h a d never read iheo would remember what D ean S w if t sa id o f persons W He had not held hi m u p to r idi cu l e , b ut he hoped f were laughed at.—(Hear, and lau g h ter .) Lord WYNFORD interrupt e d t h e Noble Lord, desired that the 15th standing order might be read. J" would then ask whether he whose duty it was to P re serve order should himself be disorderly ?—(Much O re fusion.) The LORD CHANCELLOR, having resumedh is seat on the Woolsa c k, di recte d that the 15th standla' order be reed by the chrk. was read acc or di ng l y , an d i t was f ound to req uire that all personal, sharp, or taxing speeches be forborne T y (Laughter and cheers)—that the speaker " should uPP„ e his answ er w i t h ou t wrong to ti , e person, and that h't nothing offensive ought to b e s p o k en, so nothing Og" to be ill taken"—(lminense cheering from all sues) di " that the party wh o spea k s what offends shall prese° make a fair expl ana ti on, or i f otherwise, that the /I"trie would sharply censure the offender, and c a ll u p on him ) make fit reparation or to gi ve full satisfaction."—(Cheer!') Earl GREY rose to order, but The LORD CH ANCELLOR interposed, and the Pare veiling a n d general confusion somewhat subsided. 1 ; 1 . 3 e issued their Leroships that he sh ou ld con f orm to ; p a Order, explained as it was by modern usage—(Heish)es—„,., avoid all " personal, sharp, and taxing speeches . .. o , le (Cheers and laught er .) H e on ly h ope d t h at h i s N and Learned Friend would on his part take nod:1410e , hat was not offensively spoken.—(Much cheering.) had meant to give no offence, and he hoped that s! o ' ie are had said would be taken as it w as meant. Ili s N . to .dud Learned Fri e nd did not supp ose t h at h e me ant charge wilful inaccuracy. Lord W YNFORD observ e d th at h e did not suppose ire 'file LORD CHANCELLOR i ntende d on l y to' iiy hre misrecollection, from want of co ns id erat i on . That nr • ten ,vas anything unparliementary in that, or in saying Ht toes more then that, he wee incapable of believing. ee ilia Noble and Learned Friend ilia no'. happen to recollect L o d (intents of his own Bill ; that was ele "e (tl a t ' d 2haneellor) had thought it singular that the Noble .f 90 1 Learned Chief Baron should have !Stated the peoPoseC4' ttopbpact to tgrtbs vLelpnetlLocttuootooo r j hgifiii,ailioeostauf fiu,s e etboe.esoan u a3taeeesorpini a ttsW2mantrti cmsigt d trtishetehur l .erd:o, h6eeie eg g phie2ier 8, esl Noble nnmetvec n nsndansswev—da e eubve,tsgoe,.idwga su :orr,m,poeotiendiughelatpi m i Itomuanofnesthi f is ,ilelenhatr o hnottolleFli 0. seina,el. i b iprret rteta r ia d :rosoe e ra.:_tegeahrfu.sBtelye,di rt nr_awdnt i ,aao,Lenhrhatedipalr.hhdaesitvoofyihndendeseotiaaeoedebegyrrattscti other,, t f p he used a shar] he said that ni all warranted t sure would be Bibleel vpgrtaYett hadre.urnt each, tut oa w sra t i( appointed l:neot ` tl,,, .. o. l n°4' h i f Wi e utce ' or n i L e: s t I tu e e' t. nr t i t ilia ' B °' . h i i . V enie ntV c i 3,10, r 1 ni . l h tli e nei u el t d hiae ls ch n a sa nra i l: l ed en td d s i e l: , 0 : I:catit f p.l e u h ete t. t,_aa e ey ° .rvi c .rwf t .ra . ion l i e t n rileeti g t P sh a a? t eb l l ni r e ° e n ,biafil a n or . But th .._e_egratification `',Y.'an as unchec cUonro cellar had B . Pten e ., of dnic r „„ . ; Patr oos ,,r -- (It b ot .._, 6e I was i thou d t t°b P i i d n' t i- i Y t b a n h td e r4 : at o Othe f na H: t h bh e e ee. f] i ad gad i d a a 1 e b g u stn allest ' • "eane ece tser so official Y. Th e be , as aignees no ne rKuted al where aPPointed orn • their mai pre on ce. i assignee; cand id "ad he •on a ..1, LI 7 2 0 v o j r b b y tales a defer P ', 1 f. 4 t t h)we. a ri r n ii , y ttToehp o nii n tei e r,t °f e l _ po tf ank e ven, comp their ° f Englanc i r list, and h ad nothin g nit a ppointment tin. [already with gr ' 43 fthe Peace. T l'i a rcely ever rec `_ who, saw that a '° have been pt It was 1, 18 course "ju'tie' Learn e d l ver y e b ar -- Lo rd w . as ged its possi Z to hi m .14 i°ebi e ri---• rv b d 1.1 1 .lieear, hea u r, t, h i 4 l eanalrened Lord ht th ch„ , and a ll th ged, °II this a to o t e h ad read of th : and wi t h to an ae wh o h oe Lord r ' L an d witty read L 'ancello r ' it had hY the N o t' ' 'natt er be e ° e ° read, did °o of that t think I ea °'e th i Nobl e en to th e e .,?(1 t an is ti Learn ro () 'Y th e o t h e Pre aerv e t h I ),,,, right of e ' 44 1 , " far as a t P l! Court s as '' Lord ts of ~.., it wh Westi n who „.. ° supp ot r eforo' °lf ed it th ou '• so d id L . gh h o f hee d B l e itl'l ' t il l, L o r d r e e vi e th67i : al--- Noble t five Years , o w e 0 . ref or ,2 ° Pot*, trib unal ' th e Of ' 00 r ;, refor m eel ..., and w as to, do ? th , wh ell t self. , , t -Y o w __ nal h s '(A L it , " t g t p ro laugh * th (ll ' ,,, t: Pl(,)und -18 t o , -ear ) 41,, Bill was h eard the re nOt al": referl With • Surpn th e t o tw o bills in eit Is loble and ; ta ,rred since , in t 04 ce. In on e 44 , and the 4 00 , t 0t of th e d e 4 4/. B er ' the pi ot her . 10 d. C Wi th e' th nni 4 e e was th es ,„. cause that, aft soli cause of tli et er one i against hi yep Zrcket. T i 1 1 2 , , r, Th e g' o ' t ,Bench t ern ...a , ntiff , • ',er e ,' pal, t),1 1„,, " I ) . 66 tii, hut ''', anlo u , l or c en e Was 16 /. , t he the Nan ( th j e iZ ell Inigl i t t kedi e ' who did th e , ' add then an .. with atoos Carpi, d iVIY th e ° ,exPun flou r i s h - ..:'llife t that the ‘l'.th 4 h 5 "re fo a lent Ch r th " 4 e aP tere tiro, tt'io • r °' t o , (4 ) , r mght AL, L rear no 10 • J (t1 ( • 1 s ted z s 'ger h 'Nigh L - 0 I 4 "e oueh, 11()tmentioned : t Ti . 111 the k o . a. the time 41:44 at both e4 ttt " i 4 f avour 11, t r. "" Wh at ° ql 11, nor 1 t hil 4 rta , ay, t ,,4; Yet w , ‘ 4 Cos tly t rice? tv , ,it hose who "k '" denyin ghr. a month,