The Sun. — London, England, 1830-04-30 00:00:00

~ lecilion and to rands obvious would snd an -to (Ii" h arises larger, will bs respect pect of gable of icitlarli rill be ie sub. thee' trial-;" of O wn" be in this o f the onti if- ;estions ich tbe i . rth)r °' w orthy seeded. rerveo ode 0 1 ittle as ly ,a,li can be eetings period re dis tors of of thg . BY to be he hid suitors . ted to to so' °twit' • of ton fling l . before e tinie of the for it with what age.. :all its Sister tat yrs here ig he ex abould hether the low it been ;mind vsteins stems ensive were tment ration find upwards—this was of course exclusive of such mat ters -as had been tried before Justices of the Peace. Now taking a comparative view of the property in England and in Scotland, and assuming that the wealth of the one was between six and seven times as great as that of the other, we should, had we similar Courts in England, have between 120,000 and 130,000 causes tried in Eng land in the same time. Of the number of actions com menced, not one-eleventh are brought to trial--not per haps 7,000 in 80,000. The County Court I regard as °no peculiarly well calculated to afford satisfactions to suitors ; and to those who may be satisfied there will always be the appellate jurisdiction; and to those who may have more difficult or complex questions to decide, and graver causes of action to bring forward, there will a jwalahe the superior court. The Sheriff's Courts of Scot -Than...ad IlisPose in a manner perfectly satisfactory to the great of th e i n h a bi ten te, a great amou nt o f causes, and a gredt- a mount of property. In the district of Lanark, Which include s Glasgow, there is, one year with another, Prora t e,, ) to the amount of 500,0001. decided on—if the e Proportions to t subsisted in an E ou ngli be sh district property, he amount of 3,000,000 wld disposed of in the same tunes Have we then in all this nothing to induce Us to recur to our old law—the English law, the Saxon i hlaw .of our ancestors ? Scotland has still kept it up, and as found it answer. I do not desire you to do the same merely because Scotland has done so; but we have in this country grievous and crying neschiefs which the people of that country have not. Let us try if, by the adoption of that system, we may not, in some degree, remedy the evil of which we have had so much reason to complain. Be fore coining to the proposition with which I mean to con elude, I shall briefly advert to the expense of the Sheriff's Court in Scotland. A debt of 121., where there is no liti gation, or what in this country would be called an unde fended cause, the expense is 10s. ; where the sum amounts to 25/. the cost is 15s. ; and when it amounts to 501. the cost is little more than 15s. : and where it amounts to 100/. the cost is only 20s. There are cases where there is no litigation—where the causes are undefended—but even where there is litigation, the expense is trifling corn- Pared to what it is in this country. Even in a contested Face, where the matter in dispute amounts to 121. it may ne recovered for costs of 51. taxed, and the recovering Party is only put to an expense or actual loss of ss. ; where th e amount is 50/. it may be recovered for 101. or 12/. with a loss of 10s. or 12s. ; and even a debt of 1001. without the euccesaful party losing more than 20s. Now with all my prejudices in favour of English judicial esta blishments aud the English system of jurisprudence, I must be allowed to say that I do envy Scotland the possession and enjoyment of that tribunal—that cheap and convenient justice. I may venture to call it cheap, when 100/. can be recovered for an outlay of 12/., and an ultimate loss of twenty shillings. I may well call it cheap when in this country 100/. can seldom be recovered Without the sacrifice of half the sum. It now remains for us to consider bow we can extend the County Courts to this country, and adapt that jurisdiction to the system of making the capital the source of general justice fur the realm at large. I feel that I am trespassing much upon the indulgence of the House by thus entering inta detail, and I should gladly avoid doing so if I ceull accomplish the object which I have in view without entering into those minute par ticulare.—( Hear, hear.)---It is the greatest possible error to imagine that interior suitors ought to have inferior Judges ; that when questions are to he decided re ePectireg persons of superior rank, wealth, and intelligence, mea of superior intellect and station should be provided for that purpose ; that when a matter of 100/. or upwards is te be decided, a high and distinguished Judge should be employed for that purpose; but that a matter only involv ing two, three, five, or six pounds, any thing will do for a Judge; a Sheriff, o r a Sh e riff Assessor, or whatever name ty.bear, any one w ill answer t o p res id e i n a Court for :utal ma td ni. aioet s of su c h p e tty concerns, whether he be a mn unqualified—a man of sense or a man of no itenoeseeiLtfo:igfy ptnhieoor man, it seems to be the opinion that it what sort of judicature he has to decide i f caus es. To my mind no notions appear to be more etude than these. Forty shillings are of more importance to hi~n than the sum for which the great man litigates; and the poor man contest , not only for the sake of the sum lat issue, but that he might not be subject to wrong and ; and he feels that oppression the more grievous Mel intolerable, seeing that it is an evil reserved for the elms to which he himself belongs. It is net always for th° a wn disputed that he goes to law : he proceeds in re aistance of wrong and oppression, and he sues as readily for 2e. as for 405., in the resistance of that wrong. In thus frame of mind, then, he goes away from Court as rash' di ssatisfied as the wealthier suitor who has lost di L s - )fi ° l - and, give me leave to say, he has a right to be a „ -- „ s a ° llt ed, and his is a dissatisfaction which will not be - lar' l laesi otherwise than by a full supply of that justice hitherto denied him. I know these Judges in the Courts of Request do good—l say they do good by comparison, better something of justice than nothing--it may be slo v enly justice, •but so precious a thing is justice that I slsould rather have even slovenly justice than the absolute, peremptory, and'inflexible denial of all justice. It hap pens that "tradesmen, who know nothing of law, and who may not have much occupation in their own business, preside at these Courts of Request, and admi nister as well as might be expected. I say it is better to have these than have none. There are two hundred and. forty of these Courts of Request, with jurisdiction of front 40s. to 5/. ; but that is not enongh—the system of cheap justice must be more widely extended. I shall now advert to a prevailing error—that which goes to recommend the use of a local appellate jurisdiction—that Lthink open to this, among other objections, that it would lead to one system of law for one district, and a dif ferent system for another. I may here step aside to ob serve that I wish the appellate jurisdiction received more attention in the quarter that ought to attend to it than I find it does ; and, while upon this subject, I cannot help expressing a desire, with reference to colonial appeals, that ther e were upon the Privy Council some Judges, who, by their k nowledge of, and residence in, the colonies, would have acquired some acquaintance with their laws and re- Dilations, instead of that body, as it now does, knowing I , l . ; th ie. j `! g of•the feelings of the people whence those appeals I hav e th rown ou t, i n p ass i ng , th ese few observa tions on the nature of the appellant jurisdiction, and the evils whi c h i n it seem to me to require remedy, although that branch of the administration of justice is not imme diately connected with the question before me. While, h wever, I am on th a t par t o f t h e su bj ec t, I ma y as well !!'y a few words on the nature of the appellant jurisdic tion, as it- operates on our brethren of Scotland—(Hear, hear)--who have, in my opinion, very great reason to complain of the-practice which sends them in all cases of the - last • resort, to the House of Lords in this country. I do think that the anomaly which this practice presents in has Case of our brethren o f S cot l an d— an anoma l y w hi c h llas existed ever since the Union, affords there very reason able ground of complaint ; and the patience with which they. have borne the evil of being compelled to bring all their appeals in the last resort to this country, and very frequently before men who were not acquainted with the peculiar nature of the Scotch law, on which the decisions of the lower Court were founded, has always appeared to Ate unaccountable. Our neighbours of Siodand seem to be well aware of the nature of their rights, and to be by 110 means unwilling to enter into litigation, as, indeed, all Persons are bound and have a right to do, who feel that they are wronged; and I confess I can only explain their Patient endurance of the evil I have described, and which ; utast be so great an obstacle to their obtaining cheap and :h co ncurrence Justi ce , b y suppos i ng i t to h ave b een ow i ng to, of accidental circumstances. In the first yher e. iw w ere not matey appeals immediately after the and n the next place, there happened at the same time to be a succession of Lerd Chancellors in this c00n ,e,17, who, to the very highest fame as lawyers at the Eng lish Ber--aebo, t o a reputa ti on p aramoun t a b o ve that of all' their as contemporaries, and which at once pointed them the more fit to be raised to such an eminence— added that other—it appears a most essential—qualifica tion, a thorough knowledge of the nature of the practice uf Scot c h appeals, from having been, for many years of their lives employed in them as advocates before their ele vation to the Woolsack. First, then, was Lord Hard- Wicke, who, in addition to the highest qualifications for the Performance of the ditties of Lord Chancellor as an English lawyer, possessed the reputation of being thoroughly well acquainted with the law of Scoteh appeals. Then there came Lerd Mansfield, who, in addition to the highest name as a lawyer, was himself a Scutchman, and long employed as an advocate in Scotch appeals. Then there followed Lord Loughborough, who was also an eminent Scotch lawyer; and to these eminent men succeeded Lord F.ltion—a man who, besides standing as high in repute- L I Z as co an ke En h g im lis sf' heila.wyer as any Judge since the times of who, besides, I say, being mar vellemsly-supeCemicently skilled in every branch of English law, .adtled to his extraordinary acquirements that of being pmdigiously learnedin and had actuall in every part of the law of Scotland, hi e s lit e in I m,, been employed for full fifteen years of before the 14onsi'or LoeverY appeal which was be.srd great men It was to a succession of these EtigiNtde,ndaa's.Lord Chancellors, that we were doubtless to look, tience with which our brethied on to account for the pa bot:ite the ileConVeriience of three of Scotland have hitherto . n system of appeals. But if the time ever came when a•-peesou wou ld - fill the situation of Judge in the last resort, wh o, e moderate acquaint gaaa with English Law, gained. his 4_ ..Cst kn ow ledge of Scotch Law from being called on to decide on the merits of an appeal from the decision of the Courts of Scotland, then the anomaly would be seen in its full force ; but the means of accounting for it would be gone. I cannot, 'in deed, avoid—let it give offence where it may—expressing my opinion on this occasion that the nature of the arrange ments, with respect to the disposal of Scotch Appeals, is a subject infinitely worthy of the best, the most serious, and the earliest consideration of his Majesty's Government— ( liear, hear.) I have been somewhat drawn aside from the question before me by the observations I have felt it my duty to make on the nature of the appellate Jurisdic tion ; but having said thus much, I shall now proceed to explain in what manner I propose to carry into execution the principles I have laid down, and to show how a tri bunal may be constituted, through which the people of this country may be able to obtain that most desirable object, cheap justice, in the speediest manner, in a cause of a moderate amount. What I suggest then is, that there be appointed in each county or district, as the case may be, a lawyer of a certain number of years' standing, who is to be the Judge in the last, instance, in causes under a certain I sum, and in the first instance under certain regulations, in causes over that sum. In the first case, I would enable this Judge in all cases where the sum in litigation is under ten pounds, to call the parties before him—to examine both the claimant as well as his adversary—to dispose of the claim—to give judgment—to award execution—and to specify the time when, and the amounts in which the in stalments in furtherance of that execution arc to he paid. Above the sum of ten pounds I would give the parties power to go before the same Judge, who would be authorised to call on the adverse party to answer, they having power to employ professional assistance if thought necessary, and to determine the matter in dispute, and examine witnesses if they so think fit. I would limit the jurisdiction of the Officer, or Judge I may call him, in this instance to the sum of 100/. in point of value, but I would not limit him witn respect to the nature of the causes to be tried—for I would give him jurisdiction over all causes except those relating to freehold or copyhold property. I would give him jurisdiction in all . matters of torts, as well as of debts, but I would make his decision in these cases open to ap peal, final, in all matters above ten pounds—open to view in all causes from ten up to one hundred pounds. I. now proceed to show in what way I think this appeal should be managed, and I cannot but think that it would be a great relief to the suitors if this appeal lay to the Judges on Circuit, and not to the Superior Courts of Westminster Hall. There might, however, be good rea sons in some cases for not bringing the appeal before a particular Judge going Circuit, and I should therefore remedy that inconvenience by allowing the option of an appeal to Westminster Hall, with certain restrictions only as to costs. I would allow, therefore, an appeal either to Westminster Hall or the Judges on Circuit ; but, if the party carried the cause to the more distant and expensive tribunal, I would allow the opposing party double, or, in some cases, perhaps, treble costs. I think it right to add, for the satisfaction of those professional gentlemen who may hear me, that by these appeals—l mean motions for new trials in all cases where the Judge may have ruled a disputed point of law, or he supposed to have decided contrary to the evidence—in these cases I would allow a motion to be made to the Judge going the ensuing Circuit for a new trial, notice being given to the other side that it is intended to make the motion, in order that he may be present at the Assizes, and have Counsel ready to argue the case if he thinks fit. Ido not mean that this is to be according to the practice usual in the Court of Common Pleas, where the party, without notice to the other side, obtains a rule to show cause, and the matter is afterwards heard upon that rule being served on the other side, but I mean it to be according to the long established practice of the Equity Courts, where the notice is served before the hearing, and the Judge has an opportunity of knowing the whole merits of the case by hearing both parties before him. lam now giving an outline of the measures which I think necessary to accomplish my object, but I have not yet mentioned the necessity of having recourse to Trial by Jury. Far be it from me to say that there are not many cases in which the 'trial by Judges might fairly be dispensed with ; but when in connection with the question of Trial by Jury, the name of Mr. Jeremy Bentham is forced on my recollection—a man whose merit as a philosopher, and as a benefactor of mankind, is above all praise—a man who has the transcendent merit —I say it without hesitation—of being the founder of all legal reform, and who must go down to future ages with the reputation of having been the only great and effectual purifier of our judicial system—when I pay to him the tri bute of my admiration and my gratitude for the eminent services he has rendered to his country and to mankind during the course of his long, laborious, and useful life— ( Hear, bear)—l retract no praise, I qualify no admira tion, when 1 say, in connection with this subject, that far from agreeing with him in tke whole of those reforms, which he ! has at various times proposed—(Hear, hear) —I differ from him in degree—he going much farther in some instances than I am in some instances disposed to go. But I differ from him also in the kind of reform which he proposes—but in nothing more than in that which he sue.. pets with respect to trial by Jury. Ido not mean to say that he is an enemy to trial by jury, but I think he under values its importance in cases in which I believe it to be peculiarly applicable. On all points where conflicting tes timony is produced--wherever many witnesses are exa mined—whenever a great variety of documentary and pa ! role testimony has been produced—wherever the cir cumstances of the case are such that no direct tee- timony can be brought forward to show on which side lies the truth—l say, thcp, that in these, and in all the variety of cases connected with them, trial by jury is of incalculable value in ascertaining to which party belongs the right in dispensing rigid and impartial justice. And I contend that there were never any means so perfectly well fitted to that end as the as sembling twelve men of various habits—of different de grees of experience—of different kinds of- feeling—of dif ferent forms of understanding, and bringing them all to bear upon the same case; and make their minds, however differently constituted, weigh the nature of the evidence brought before them. It may seem a little paradoxical ; but it is hue, that the snaking their concurrence com pulsory has always appeared to me to be one of not the least important of the peculiar advantages of this method of trial. If the question to be decided by a Jury was once allowed to a majority, then the result would be, that those who were anxious to get through the business would commence disturbing the delibera tions of the others by just some such cries of " Ques tion" as we sometimes bear impatiently urged by more pilished • and intellectual assemblies—.(A laugh)—and there would be no possibility of any question being thoroughly and fairly discussed. It might scorn para doxical, but I repeat that this kind of compulsory una nimity has always appeared to me to be a very great advantage. I have sa , d before that I would give this tribunal power over all civil actions under one hundred pounds; and among these I would include actions for assault, for false imprisonment, and all cases of. injury to property : and I trust, if the plan I propose be not carried into full effect at once, that at all events I shall have the satisfaction of seeing an experiment take place in some parts of the country; and I can have no doubt that the effect will then be such as to lead to its universal adoption. Alluding to the trial by jury, I must say, however, that I have found it extremely difficult to determine what cases should or should not be left for trial by Jury ; not for want of time—for I have long and frequently deliberated upon the subject--but I confess I am unable to specify what cases should or should not be tried by a Jury. All cases above 101. I propose, therefore, to leave in some measure dependent on circum stances. The pleadings in a ranee will now, by the sug gestion of the Law Commissioners, be brought within a moderate compass. They will now, as of old, tell the very story of the plaintiff and of the defendant. They will tell what the cause is which is to be tried. The defendant will know what the plaintiff demands from him, and the plaintiff will know what is the real defence to the action. The Commissioners in their second Report, have recom mended various alterations in the pleadings, and I have no doubt, that by the adoption of others better fitted to the local judicature, all difficulties in that way would be done away with. With the ease then clearly stated in the pleadings, I apprehend there can be no difficulty in a Judge being able to say at once, that this is a case that ought not to go to a Jury. I would, however—although I permit the Judge to make this declaration—impose a restraint upon its exercise. If the Judge says there is no necessity for a reference to a Jury, and if the parties themselves are willing to admit that it should not be referred to a Jury, then I say no mischief can be done by allowing the Judge and the parties to dispo,e of the case in a manner which may seem must agreeable to them. Having now stated the kinds of action which I would allow to be brought in these Courts, and having stated the nature of the judica ture which I think Parliament are bound to give their sanction to for the attainment of that most desirable ob ject—the speedy, cheap, and convenient administration of justice—l now come to that upon which I shall be ex pected to say a few words, namely, the expense attendant on the system I would wish to introduce. That this Judge or Officer must be a man of weight in his proles .ion is beyond all doubt; and I think, therefore, it will be admitted that - he ought - to have a salary adequate to the rank be may hold in his profession. Far this salary I "am ilso ready to admit he should work constantly. The sit tings should be at least once in the month, for ten months its in the year. Six of thoe lake pilf.e the principal town in the e:miitr, two in each of t!i , two principal towns in entit,tv. that he miy able to carry about wit's hit a retirus+ to every in door; and that those who are siqpted in remote part , of the district may twi..e a year .it least have an oppot- tunity of bringing their cases before a competent tri bunal. In Ire!awl the Assistaet Barristers, and in Scotland the Sheriff Courts, have long need with out the intervention of a Jury, on a principle re sembling that which I now wish to introduce ; and although I have not heard that any inconvenience resulted from t'fe practice, even when the sum in dispott has frequently amounted to 201. or 301., - yet I think it more eligible to have the benefit of a Jury when it is con sidered desirable. I have said that the parties are to be at liberty to move for a nem trial before Vie Judge on Circuit. I think it necessary that the Minor Court should attend on such °evasions ; and that he should therefore be in tire Commission of Assize. Sitting with the Judge, reading his report of the tria', when the point reserved comes to be ' considered, it must be highly advantageous to to have his assistance in the course of the argument. That he should have no voice in the decision, experience and reason com bining to satisfy us. I say it without prejudice to any of the Judges, that though it has proved very convenient, when motions for new trials are considered, that the Judge who tried the cause should be present, yet the fact of that Judge having a voice in the decision, and sitting therefore to support it, although it may be erroneous—fur Judges sometimes are—sitting., therefore, I say to support his own opinion, to bolster up error, and to back the prejudices which he may have conceived at the trio', I know that it has operated, and does frequently lead to inisdecision ; and I have myself frequently witnessed cases in which I was morally certain the decision would have been different if the cause in which the application was made had come out of a Court in which one of the Judges then sitting to hear the Appeal had not presided. I repeat, therefore, that it is not consistent with experience to- allow this Judge to have a voice, although his presence may be of advantage ; and I apprehend that these appeals, even when not carried into execution, will have an ex cellent effect in superintending, as it were, the whole ad ministration of the law ; and that they will have the effect of preserving the same law throughout the country, and avoiding those differences which might grow up, and which might give us one law here, and another there, if there were not some general tribunals to regulate the dif ferences of opinion. I come now to the expellee which must be incurred by this system. That these Judges must have competent salaries will be admitted, and that their Court must possess an officer somewhat in the cha racter of a registrar, an assistant clerk, and one or two ushers, cannot well be denied, because, if we create these Courts at all, we must do it in such a manner as to ren der them competent to the end proposed. Looking, there fore, at the expence in the most economical point of view, I think 1,500/. a year would not be too much for the sa lary of such an officer. That he must be a man of emi nence in his profession is plain ; and so far from thinking that sum too large, I have some doubt whether it is not too little. Taking the whole expence of the whole of these Courts at such a scale, and including all the neces sary officers, I think it will amount to something about 120,000/. or 130,000/. a year. Let those who consi der this sum as large, look to the amount which France pays for a- cheap and convenient adininistration of jus- tice. In France there are between 3,500 or 4,000 Local ➢lagistrates, whose duty it is to decide on cases to the amount of one hundred francs, which is about four pounds sterling, but looking to the difference in the value of money in the two countries, it might, perhaps, he more fairly estimated at double the amount. For this portion of the administration of its justice, France pays the sum of 121,0001. sterling yearly. After these come the Courts of Premiere Instance, of which there are bet ween three and four hundred for Arrondisements. The Judges of these amount to 1,600, and they are supported at an es• pence of 125,0001. a year. Then follows the Courts of Appeal, which cost 70,0001. a year ; and, lastly, there is the Cour de Cassation, being the Court of ultimate ap peal, the expence of which is 25,000/. a year. The whole civil administration of justice in France costs, therefore, something above 300,0001. a year. The whole civil and criminal cost 525,000/. a year. But, again, considering the difference in the value of money and cheap living in the two countries, this may be reckoned at something not much short of 800,000/. a year of our money. That France has thought wisely that there was no price too high—no sum too great to be paid for a speedy and effectual administration of justice—and that we can possibly grudge 130,0001. or 150,000/. a year for the some inestimable advantage, I shall never be lieve until I am taught it . by a vote of this House. Why it really would not amount to one three weeks of the extra expenditure of the last year of the late war. I do not mean that the ordinary expences of the country, or the interest of the debt, or any other of the settled burthens—nor do I mean to say that we spent only 50,000/. a week during that period of the war. What I aay is, that we spent a sum in any three weeks of the last year of the war sufficient to have purchased in perpetuity the whole annuity required now for a cheap, speedy, and certain administration of justice. I do not mean to say that the functions of these officers are to he wholly confined to litigious cases. I conceive they can be employed with great effect as arbitrators, and that many causes can, by their assistance, be settled out of Court, without the necessity of a tall. If it is allowed that the Judge appointed has meat enough to deserve the confi dence of the Government, and therefore possess the cha racter of an able lawyer and upright man, then it must be admitted that he is as competent to decide between parties as an arbitrator, as any person who could be chosen. What would he so likely to satisfy parties dis posed to enter into litigation, as that the same persons who were qualified to sit as Judges in their cause, should be empowered and prepared to act as arbitrators between them ? Sir, there is still another subject on which I wish to say a few words ; but as I am unwilling to trespass longer on the patience of the House, I will merely treat it generally and cursorily. I allude to Courts of Conciliation, The advantage which must re sult from talking a matter over calmly and privately with litigant parties ; to tell a plaintiff that it was foolish for him to proceed—for that it was clear that he must lose his cause, or tell a defendant that it was foolish for him to continue his defence as lie must be saddled with costs, must, it would appear, be occasionally attended with the greatest advantages. It is indeed the line which a good, a faithful Counsel always takes when he is called upon for advice. Nevertheless, the fact is, that in several cases the experiment has filed. It has failed wherever the resort to the Conciliation Courts has been compulsory. I n France it has signally failed. M. Levaaseur, a distinguished French writer on legal subjects, has stated that the cases of reference to a Court of Conciliation, in which the differences between parties have been amicably settled, were always extremely rare, anal that of late years those Courts have become a dead letter. In the Netherlandsand in Holland the same thing has been experienced ; so much so, that it is not intended to renew those Courts in the re moulding of the legal code of those countries, which is at present going on. 1 understand, however, that in Sweden the result of the establishment of Courts of Conciliation has been more favourable. In Denmark the advantages have been greater than anywhere else. In Switzerland, from which country I have the most authentic information, the experience of two districts has been different. In the one, in which it has been compulsory on contending parties to go in the first instance before the Court of Conciliation, and to receive the advice of the Judges of that Court, be ing prevented from commencing an action in a Court of Law without the previous possession of a certificate of non conciliation from the first Court, the cases of benefit have been few. But in Geneva, where the resort to the Court of Conciliation is more of an optional nature, I find, from returns which I have received for three years-1825, 1826, and 1827—that from one-third to one-fourth of the whole of the actions brought into the Court of Conciliation have terminated either by withdrawing the proceedings or by the conciliation of the parties. I do not exactly know what proportion the one of those modes of termination has borne to the other ; but I imagine that they are nearly equal, and consequently that from a seventh to an eighth of the cases brought into the Court of Conciliation, at Ge neva, have been settled by the conciliation of the parties. But then it is if the parties phase to bring them. It is not compulsory on either party to do so. When, however, the cues do come before the Court of Conciliation, the result has been that which I have described. Such being the fact, I have a right to maintain that this is no impracticable measure ; I have a right to maintain that the suggestion to establish similar Courts in this country is a suggestion founded on the success of those Courts elsewhere. Why is it that we frequently find a man go into a Court of Justice with a case which turns out to be wholly unsupportable? Because that he has, more or less, been misled by advice. Not frequently by his Barrister ; not frequently by having received from his Counsel an opinion, that an action is maintainable which is not maintainable, God forbid that I should suppose any such thing. I well know that a Coun sel is more apt to dissuade from litigation than to encourage it; that he is disposed rather to throw cold water upon a litigious disposition—to express doubts, where there seems the slightest foundation for them. This I well know to be the codaman course of the profession, in at least ninety nine cases out of a hundred. I need hardly say, that it is the course adopted by all respectable men; I need hardly, 4 y, that whe e it i. not adopted, the man is not reepect dile. Bt, are sz os i s my lesning towards the pro ':amen of the le-ea—highly as I estimate the honour, the integrity, end the ether valiathle qualities of the great mess of it monileirs —sineerely as I beieve, that instances of a departure from just principle are exceedingly rare among them, I will wet sly that there are no such departures even in that branch of the profession to which I have the honour to belong. I will not say that it is absolutely ssible to find a man at the liar who may occasionally give an opinion, the effect of which is to encourage his client to proceed, when he ought to give an opinion, the effect of which would be to discriurage him. Still less will I say, Sir, that there may not be found men in the other branches of the profession who will go to such a man to get that identical opinion ; and who, if they do not succeed in get ting it, will substitute an opinion of their own, and tell their client be is sure to gain, what they ought to know, and what they do know, he is sure to lose, This I know that men cone every day to consult Counsel, and that when those Counsel have heard their case, they lift up their hands and eyes, and wonder who could have advised them to go to law. It, does happen in some instances that parts of a case are kept back from a Counsel. Now, in all cases, the man who is the most ignorant of the chances of success or failure is the unfortunate client, who, it is not surprising, therefore, is some - imes enticed to go on until he finds too late that he has been deceived. The men tyke deceive their clients ignorantly and unwittingly, are, perhaps, not a few; the men who deceive their clients wilfully and knowingly, are, I hope, very few. Bat my respect for those branches of the profession which com prehend solicitors and attorneys, any more than my re spect fur my own branch of the profession, will still not allow me to deny that the cases are frequent where an attorney will draw his client on to a desperate and un certain litigation, less frequent where an attorney will involve his client in a suit which he well knows he must lose. In such cases, if the client would only be seen and talked to by men of knowledge, integrity, and sta tion, apart from his attorney; and if he should be told that his cue either was one of a desperate character, sir seas one in which he must he inevitably defeated, I am persuaded that the utter ruin of the client would often be averted. This, Sir, is an opinion founded on reason, and founded also upon observation and experience. lam con vinced that the appointment of persons of great knowledge and integrity, to whom such a reference could be made, would be attended with the most beneficial consequences. I am convinced that the appointment of local Judges for this and the other purposes which I before described would give cheap justice to the whole country. Whether or not my opinion on that subject will be the opinion of these whose opinion is most influential in this House I do not know; but this I know, that they who reject my propesi tine are imperatively called upon, by the state of existing circumstances, to point out some other proposition, the adoption of which may be productive of equal benefits. I care not for the names of institutions; nothing is so useless, or indeed absurd as to preserve the name of an institution when its substance has disappeared.— Let them, therefore, call their proposed institution by what name they will—let them arrange the details of that institution as they will—that it is imperative upon them to propose something—that the circumstances of the present time are so exigent that we can no longer go on without an extensive amelioration of our legal system—are facts, of the reality of which I am not less per- snarled than I are of my own existence, or that I stand here addressing the House of Commons. Sir, the people have a right to this amelioration—they are crying out, they arc impatient for it. It is for want of it that they distrust the intentions of Government; it is fur want of it that they distrust those who are desirous of introducing other descriptions of reform. Sir, I have heard it said, when auy one has raised his voice against abuses, that he was clamouring against our existing establishments; that he was attacking our venerable Institutions ; that he was endeavouring to subvert the ancient law of the land. But, Sir, that where there is abuse there ought to be clamour ; that voices ought to be raised where grievances prevail, is a principle for which I have no less an authority than than that of Mr. Burke; no friend of popular clamour, no inciter of popular delusion, no hot-headed and visionary reformer, no impugner of the wisdom. of our ancestors, no foe' to established institutions. Mr. Burke has said, in words that deserve to be inscribed in letters of gold over the door of every Legislative Assembly--" Where there i■ abuse there ought to he clamour. It is better to have our slumbers broken by the fire-bell, than to perish in flames in our beds."—(lfear.)—Sir, in my attempts to produce some beneficial change in these matters, I have been ex poeed to two clams of antagonist objectors. By the one I have been told that the reform I proposed is insufficient, unavailing--that it is merely a mock reform. From others, I learn that what I propose is rashly dangerous, that I am reckless of consequences, that I shall risk institutions which are the objects of the attachment and veneration of all good men. I deny both the one and the other of these imputations. As on the one hand, I have no intention to confine myself to a mock !dorm, so on the other hand, I am conscious that what I do propose will not endanger any thing which deserves to be preserved. Idisregard the con demnation of those who do not know my motives ; but, above all, I disregard the base slanders of others, some of whom I will venture to say, are perfectly conscious of the falsehood of the charges which they launch against me. Because I have not proceeded more rapidly in the course which I have prescribed to myself, because I have not proceeded in it hastily, because I have not proceeded in it rashly, I have lived to lee myself charged with being engaged in a secret and corrupt league with those who are fattening by the abuse which I am a❑x ious to abate. I have been so charged ! I ! Who at the very moment when these infamous slanders were propagating, was refusing the highest official station ; and refusing it because I was engaged in pursuits and objects which must prevent the renewal of the proposi tion—refusing it upon principle ; upon political and pub lic, as well as upon personal considerations. But, Sir, did I regard the slander? Was I silenced by it? Did it make me change colour? Did it induce me to falter in my course ? Did it not rather quicken the pace at which I was advancing? False honour cheers, and lying fame alarms, Whom ? but the worthless and the false ?" It has been the lot of all men, in all ages, and all countries, who have aspired to honour by endeavouring to instruct or benefit mankind, to have their path beset by real adversaries or fictitious friends. By the one no quarter is shown them ; by the other no kind or chari table construction is put on their actions. They are placed on the horns of a dilemma ; but tiuth will survive when calumny has had its day. For iny own part, I have regarded with equal indifference the censures of those who have thought me too. hot and rash, and the censures of those who have thought me too cold and slow. I have felt the justice of the converse of the declaration—" Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you." Whe ther, however, i may be considered too timid, or too ad venturous. I shall go steadily forward ; .pursuing the prin ciples which have been laid down for us by those who have gone before us, and who have left us their example and their success ; the one for our imitation—the other for our encouragement ; in the hope that I may be even tually able to establish that local jurisdiction from which I anticipate benefits so important. I now move, Sir, for leave to bring in a Bill to establish Local Jurisdictions in certain Districts in England.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he did not rise to oppose his Hon. and Leafned Friend's motion, but to make a few observation,' on what had fallen from him in the course of his able and eloquent speech. In the first place be begged to disclaim any participation in the charges which his Hon. and Learned Friend stated had been brought against him for the course which he had thought proper to pursue. The House would not expect that he should follow his Hon. and Learned Friend into the ample field which he had entered on the present occasion. His fic.n. and Learned Friend's object appeared to be not to ' alter but to add to the Constitutio n ; an d to a dd to i t b y reviving ancient institutions, which ancient institutions his Hon. and Learned Friend considered indispensable to meet the exigency of the present times. In all that his lion. and Learned Friend had stated respecting the history of Sheriffs' Courts, he entirely concurred. He went further than his Hon. and Learned Friend, and would advert to t he Courts which were held by Lords of Manors. In fact, in those remote periods, the whole face of the country seemed to have been divided into small local jurisdictions. Was it not probable, however, from their discontinuance, that they were found to be less advan tageous than his Hon. and Learned Friend supposed? Was it not probable that those petty local jurisdictions were round to he beset with inconveniences and prejudices? W ou ld it not be very difficult to obtain in such limited districts, either impa r ti a l J ur i es or i mpar ti a l J u d ges; a dvantages which our present system secured to ? The more uniform our law was, undoubtedly the better. He was far from saying that much was not wanted to meet some of the cases to which his Hon. and Learned Friend had adverted. He was a warm advocate for new tribunals if necessary, or for an amendment of the old, in order to uphold the cheapest and most efficient adminis tration of justice. Some years ago, he had himself brought in a Bill which met the approbation of his Noble Friend a pposite, who had distinguished himself so highly on sub jects of this nature, and of his Right Hon. Friend near him—and which had passed that House—for placing the County Courts of the County Palatine of Lancaster On an improved footing, and for facilitating the administration of Tustin in them.. At that time he had stated, that if the were adopted and proved salutary, it might be made m for amending the Coanty Courts throughout the kingdom. The proposition i his lion. and Learned Friend, therefore, though of great importance, was not ali - .2;.,::ther novel. In many of the principles which had been laid down by his Hon. and Learned Friend, lie entire]; concurred, and in none more cordially than in his ad herence to Trial by Jury. Whatever philosophers might say, he trusted the people of England would never de part from that institution. It was the best tribunal for de termining on litigated facts—it placed the powers of admi nistering justice in the hands of the people, and if they were ever to part with it, it would be the first step towards the abandonment of all their civil and political privile 4 es. How were the loc:d jurisdictions to be reconciled? So far from his being influenced by any fear of subverting ancient institutions, he should be ready to concur in whatever be could find of real and practical benefit in the proposals; and he was equally as far as his lion. Friend from any dssp . , , sition to yield to any clamour that might be raised on the subject. lie, however, mairytained that the posseision of a thing, mail it was found inconvenient, was itself an advantage, and change, for the mere purpose or sake of change, was never to be desired. To seek practical go Al without the least regard to those who cried out against a subversion of ancient institutions, and against change, was his fixed determination. In the state in which the House was, be could not he expected to follow his Hon. Friend through his laborious, long, and meditated discussion. Suffice it to say, be rose to support the proposition, at least as far as respected an examination into the measure. Mr. FERGUSSON said that his Learned and Hon. Friend had prefaced his admirable address by an apology, that those who had acted with so much credit to them- &lees in the commi-sion of law inquiry, hod not touched upon the points which formed the main subject of his ad dress. It was not competent for him (Mt. Fergasson) to eater into the subjects of the new Courts, but examine into the old : but the second Report of the Commission contained some of the most important observations, and the Attorney-General ought to attend to them, as they would make the common law more effectual, and lessen the busi nso of the Equity Courts materially. The proposition was, not to supersede the jurisdiction of the superior Courts, but to enable them to give better justice to the The poor had a right to have their questions liti gated before the sane learning and the same ability as the rich ; and it was, therefore, proposed that a Judge should be appointed in every county perfectly capable of conduct ing causes with satisfaction to the public. There never had been, in any country, so equitable an institution as the Sheriffs' Courts in Scotland. The only fault now to be found with them was that they had adopted the ma chinery which encumbered the Court of Session itself. With one proposition of his Hon. and Learned Friend be could not agree. Part of his plan was that the Sheriff should be old Led to reside within the county. If this were to be enactll, the House had debated with worse than no effect the question of Welch Jurisdiction, where the obje.ltion was that the Judges officiated where they acted as Barristers on the circuit. The less the Judges resided in the county where they dispensed justice the bet- ter. He should now allude to . the manner in which the laws of Scotland were tieeided in the last resort. There never had existed a Court of Appeal in any country wh, re any men had to pronounce judgment iu the last resort, with out any knowledge of the law on which they had to decide. The Parliament and the Privy Council took upon them selves to decide upon questions of which they knew no thing, and which hail Men previously decided by persons fully competent to the decision. The tribunals in the last resort required great amendment. Cases of appeal should not be decided by the Chancellor, with the assist ance of two Lords, who took the case in rotation, hearing one day the-proceeding, whilst other Judges heard it the next ; and thus the case was decided by rotatory Judges, not one of whom had heard the whole case through.— There could not be a more able Judge than the Nobleman who now held the Seals ; but there ought to be associated with him, in cases of appeal, some persons who understood the law of Scotland. The unanimous decision of Scotch Judges was now tried by appeal to the law of England, which was totally dissimilar. He was determined to bring this subject before the House by special motion. He was ready to acknowledge that the Right Hon. Gentleman op posite (Mr. Peel) had not oily done good positively, but by affording support to the law Reforms proposed by others. Twenty years ago, any gentleman who had pro posed such alterations of the Itw as were now effected, would have been stigmatized as a Jacobin. Until the Right Hon. Gentleman was in office, the country had heard no thing but that the laws of England were the envy and admiration of t!le world; and yet in all the reform propo sitions of the Right Iron. Gentleman he came forward to show the opprobrium of the law, which, instead of being the envy, was the ridicule not only of nations, but of all foreign Jurists, and of all persons capable of judging.— There could be no better method than bringing justice to the doors of the people, and lie was disposed to let the Local Courts take cognizance-of cases to the extent of 1001. Mr. PEEL only wished to address a few words to the House upon the main subject. It could not he necessary for him to say that it was nut his intention to (Her any impediment to the introduction of the Bill proposed, for he bad placed on record his concurrence in so much of the principle and detail of the proposition that it was quite im possible for him to dissent from the Bill, though it differed in some respects from the considerations he had submitted to the House. But both measures were on the same prin ciple; and the main principle of the proposition of the Hon. and Learne.l Member was one in which he cordially concurred. The time had arrived when it was desit able to facilitate the recovery of small debts, and it was desirous to bring justice in this respect as near as possible to the homes of the people. Expellees should be lessened, and he felt no objection to the establishment of L 'cal Courts. He felt the objections which applied to exclusive jurisuie dons, but it would be very easy to establish such Local Courts, and to steer clear of those which applied to Local Jurisdictions. Much had been said with reference to the inexpediency of cheap justice. If by cheap justice they were to understand bad justice, he acknowledged that nothing could be a greater evil; but the introduction of cheap and good justice was not open to the objections by which cheap justice was sometimes assailed. There was much less evil in a litigious spirit arising from cheap justice, than in a total denial of justice for the purpose of preventing a litigious spirit. It was diffi cult to define what was a litigious spirit. The sums trifling to one man might be important to another, and he who appealed for the recovery of his wages, the amount of which might appear to some of little concern, might feel the loss of his few shillings more severely than those who legislated might feel the loss of 100/. There was as much reason to facilitate the re cover) of a just debt of a few shillings as of 10e1. It was a grievous injury to the poor, if they could not recover small sums on account of the expences of the suit; and to facilitate the recovery of small debts he was decidedly a friend. He would say, what was worse than a spirit of litigation? It was that spirit of discontent which was engendered by being told that the injured had no protec tion, and no alternative but an acquiescence in a refusal of payment. Before the present Bill was introduced, he begged to refer to the Bill for the Recovery of Small Dents which he had introduced last Session. Although his Bill did not go to an equal extent, with the Bill now proposed to be introduced, yet there was not a single clause of it that might not be inserted in the Bill of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman consistently with the prin ciples of his speech that evening. He (Mr. Peel) took no credit for introducing his Bill last Session, for the merit of introduction was entirely due to the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Althorp), and it was only bec inse the Bill could not be brought forward with due advantage by any but an official Member that the Noble Lord had delivered over to hint the pleasure of proceeding in the measure. He would now proceed to a few of the details of his Bill, to show how far they agreed with those of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. In the first place he must beg to observe that, with reference to the whole measure, it was a matter of perfect indifference whether the Bill was carried into effect by constituting anew tribunal or by improving the old. He must say, that if lie could improve the existing institution:: sufficiently for all pur poses, he would prefer to improve them, and to borrow from them all the advantages whick were derived from prescription, and the authority of ancient names and established habits. If the improvement of the County Courts would do for the projected purpose, he would rather improve them than establish anything new, for he believed that the County Courts were founded upon prin ciples well considered, and upon the comprehensive princi ples of justice. The names of them were familiar to the people of this country, and would claim for them a greater influence than if the House were to establish new tribu nals. If, moreover, County Courts were not specially abolished, they would continue in existence, and there would be two separate j u risdictions. All his Bill had proposed to effect was to increase the amount of causes in the County Courts from 21. to 101. He agreed w i t h tht Learned and Honourable Member in excl u di ng f rom t h e County Courts all cognizance of cases of freehold. The County Courts were . held at fixed periods, and he had o t S u e n t s i t s i i i e es 6n , c ia ' r n c d u bu m tO sta o w t a h l u e es : aryne feyecrg i e fi nee specified ee general a lo tine mt the extent est which onfu differentnumber d oef suit circumstances, there was a great difficulty of introducinp of all counties, and thetefo.: ad given the Quatiar Session the power of dividing large counties into different districts, and of specifying where County Court 4 should be held. The Magistrates of t* e Quarter Sessions could require the Judges of the County Courts to hell their SessOns more or less frequently. He had allowe I parties having cause of action above 107. to waive their right to the surplus, and to proceed in the County Courts for the remainder. He had proposed that both plaintVf and defendant should be examined in open Court, an I that no appeal should lie on the ground of incompetence. lle had required the trial by jury, but he doubted musk the necessity of unanimity, but at this moment he be lieved that scarcely in any County Courts could decisions be otherwise than by unanimity. He had next proposed that the Court should have the power to order the de fendant to pay his debt by instalments, which provided for cases of necessity. Another provision he had made was, that in no case should the remedy lie against the per son, but that execution against the property should issue in any county. Nothing could be more simple than the process by which these provisions were carried into effect. —(Here the Right Hon. Gentleman read from the draft of his Bill the wording of the plea. )—The fees of Court were limited by a table in the appendix, and the debt of 101. could be recovered, so far a. the Court was concerned for the expense of four or five shillings. The expencen of witnesses it was impossible to regalate by any such means. The greatest difficulty had been to deal with the Courts of exclusive jurisdiction in corporate towns. He had not abolished these, bat he had given to the County Courts a concurrent jurisdiction, being perfectly sure that the cheaper and better process in the new Courts would induce all persons to resort to them, and that the Exclusive Courts would die of them selves. The greatest remaining difficulty was, who should he the Judges, for objections had been made to the in creased patronage of the Crown. If the residence of the Judges within their counties were a sine qua XON, the appointments would be objects of local patronage. — (Hear, hear.) But if resident, a lower salary would tempt them to accept office ; and the whole objest might necessary certainly a t t h much that the less e x p e t n 1 icaen shouldl3 () al () to /. be effected at a smaller sum than had been imagined , and altogether th e : L t. :4 " Consolidatedthe Judges, wouldF ttn Fund ; fo f r o m r a th f e ui, f d e , e o s, ut th of ou w g h h i t ch no t t he ta s k ai e a rt ri lZ fiti; lt was not of the Judges would be paid. As to the tenure of the office, the question was, whether the Judge should be a local Barrister or not ? If he were a practising Bar rilter, his practices in the superior Courts would give him access to the daily progress of the science, and this must certainly be esteemed a great advantage. Besides his residence in that seat of law from which its ramifies.: tions, as the Honourable and Learned Gentleman had truly stated, extended to all parts of the empire, Must also be considered as a circumstance which would cis tlehiin to greater weight in the Court in which 144 presided, than he could Otherwise hope to possess. He thought he had now said enough to show that degree of concurrence in the proposition of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, which would naturagy preclude him from attv other course than that of voting for his Bill. He trusted be might be allowed to consider himself the associate of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in these roforms...-. Loud cheers)—and he accordingly most eheerfuliY offered him his assistance; and if his B II was found to ha such as would enable him (Mr. Peel) to dispense with his own, he would most heartily rejoice in such a conclusion of his labours.—(Loud cheering.) • Lord ALTHORP remarked, that the difficulty attend-. ing his Hon. and Learned Friend's proposition was peata liarly this—that a Judge ought always to act in the face . . . _ of a large and intelliient bar—(Hear, hear,)—for thus was a pure and correct administration of justice secured to the suitors in a Court.—( Hear, hear. )-1 he suggestion of an appeal to the Assizes from the decision of this Local Judge was different from any he had ever heard, and he thought it presented many advantages. It was not an expensive appeal ; it was within the reach of any of the suitors; and the consciousness that his dscisiou might ba examined and revised by the dodge of Assize, was likely to exercise a salutary ;Attest* upon the Local Magistrate. He was of opinion that this Judge ought decidedly to be a practised Barrister: and, he thought, alit the disadvantales which might result from any diminution of practice, would be recompensed by the reporting of eases to the su perior Courts by which the knowledge of the law, - 19 it actually s•ood, would be always kept alive. For these various reas,ns he trusted the objections offered to his Hon. and Learned Friend's measure world net be found insur • mountable. There was another point of the plan which, in his mind, was of great advantage—namely, the esta blishment of Courts of Conciliation, in which the Judgo was to act as arbitrator_ Front his own experience of the duties of a Justice of Peace, lie could undertake to Ray that infinite good might be done by this Judge's delivering those opinions which might prevent people from prOtteed- . . . ing with their quarrels at a great expense. And he thought that if such a me,sure could be introduced into the Ses sion Courts, it would be attended with the greatest advan tage..—(Hear, hear.) - The SOLICITOR-GENERAL acknowledges' that the evils arising from a variety of practise would be mitigates" by an appeal to the Superior Courts ; hat in "swat advan tages there was the corresponding evil: and here it was evident the poor suitor would not be able to prosecute his appeal, and therefore, that the administration of ju.tice would not be altogether equal. He had already expressed his opinion against local courts, and he saw so reason to change it; still he had no objection to these local courts for the recovery of small debts. But, then, as under all circumstances the jurisdiction must be local, and therefore the Judge must be resident. Now this would at once let them into many difficulties. The Judge could not be a practising barrister, because, if be attended to his judicial duties, his practice must dwindle away ; and if the contrary, his judicial du ties must be neglected. In the next place, it was to be considered that this officer would, if he might be allowed the expression, degenerate from year to year. And as to the appeal to the Judge of Assize, with whom he was to sit during the hearing, he thought nothing could be more objectionable, because es thing could more strongly tend to lower this local Judge in his own opinion, or in that of the persons amongst whom he administered justice. For, suppose that any tin( 4 , - tunate gentleman, acting in this capacity, had fallen into errors, and that his Hon. and Learned Friend were the superior Judge to explain to him what the law of the case was, in what a p:tiable situation would not this local dignitary be? As to the amount of salary, In was of opinion it could not be less than 1,500/. a year; for if this Judge were not a man capable of deciding important cases he would be utterly useless, and a gentleman of these ca pabilities could not be expected to wanders Isis practise for a small consideration. He next contended, that, a local Judge was objectionable. because it was impossible that, from the fact of his residence, and from the habits of so ciety he must form, that he Gould escape the charge of par tiality, however unjust it might be, when the interests of ()pimping parties happened to be compromised. He also objected to his acting as arbitrator, because, after having given parties in this character an advise respecting the point of law which they were not bound to pursue, in what situation would he afterwards find himself, when this very case was brought berore him? Would Its net be actually a legislating party? Besides, Its never knew a case in which an arbitrator gave satisfaction, since he was always rather disposed to cut the knot than to unravel it. And again, it was to be remembered that he could do no good unless the parties altogether unlocked their bosoms to him ; under which circumstances the future Jadge would know too muck. And lastly it was to be con sidered that acting as an arbitrator, was likely to damage a man's judicial mind. In answer to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, who had stated that the adsainis tration of justice by the Privy Council was a . moekery, he observed that the Master of the Rolls atten.ded at the sittings of this body, and that during the time of Sir William Grant their decisions had excited the admiration of the empire. If however, a better system coati be de vised for regulating the judicial concerns of the Colonies. lie had no objection to receive it, but he decidedly objected to the application of such terms, when they were entirely undeserved. _ _ . Mr. FERGUSSON explained—as thought it was a mockery when men professed to decide according to a lav, of which they were ignorant. Mr. O'CONNELL said it was late, but as the subject was one of vital importance, he trusted he might be sl owed to off:•r a few observations to the House.—(Hear, hear.)—The alterations proposed by the Hon. and Learned Alember were of undoubted utility. There object was to bring home justice to the door of every man in the coml. try. Locality of jurisdiction ought to be Sought for by every body. The Judges of these local court, ought to unite the "powers of arbitrators and conciliators with their judicial authority. In his opinion these Judges ought not to be practising barristers. The grrat ob. j!ction to the local Judges in Ireland was, that they were practising barristers ; and he thought it was nu fit that men should be as Judges deciding on times "ne day, and the next taking fees as advocates. He thouaht that. was a bad prinsip'e, and ought ea be avoided. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite hid spoken of the necessity of Jedgee residing in the metro polis, in order to keep up tire knowledge of th, laws. ft there was any such necessity, it resulted from the want of a fixed code of laws. From the vnriOlenose of our pre