The Press.
London, England, 1856-03-01 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

scribing the appellate jurisdiction of the house
as a power inherited from the earliest times,
Lord Derby said that, notwithstanding its antiquity
and the high value he placed upon the privi-
lege, he did not think it essential to the fit-
ting discharge of the other functions of the
house. The arguments against the manner in
which the judicial functions were at present dis-
charged were seven in number, viz.—first, the small
number of the judges; secondly, that their attend-
ance is not compulsory; thirdly, that their number
is uncertain ; fourthly, that there is a chance of the
failure of justice from the circumstance of no judg-
ment being delivered ; fifthly, that in some cases
there is an appeal from some individual in one capa-
city to the same sitting in another; sixthly, that the
tribunal sits only during half the year, so that during
the remaining half there is (it is said) a denial of
justice to suitors ; and, seventhly, that there is no
adequate tribunal to decide Scotch appeals. Some
of these objections had been exaggerated, but there
were difficulties in the way of remedying any of them.
The creation of life peers, or creating certain legal
functionaries life peers, would not compel their at-
tendance in the house, and would only increase the
number without adding to the weight or authority of
the tribunal. The noble lord then entered into the
question at some length, and concluded by suggesting
that, in cases of common law, the house should call
in the advice of the common law judges; in cases of

equity, that of the vice-chancellors; and have the
power, in Scotch cases, of summoning to its aid some
of the most eminent of the Scotch judges,—all cases
to be referred to the legal members of the house, as
a judicial committee, which should embody the deci-
sion of the judges in a report to the whole house,
and agreed to es a matter of form, but still presery
ing to it the right of tt.s jurisdiction.
Earl GRANVILLE moved as an amendment the ad-
dition to the motion of the words—" and, further,
how any such provision would affect the character
of this house." He thought Lord Derby's motion
the most fitting opportunity of considering the
judicial question, and regretted that the subju ct of
the constitution of the peers had been introduced in
the other house of Parliament.

Lord Campbell, Lord St. Leonards, and Lord
Brougham supported the motion for a committee,
which, as amended, was agreed to.
The Earl of DERBY immediately afterwards pro-
ceeded to nominate the members of the proposed
committee, which is to include the noble earl himself,
the Lord President, Earl Grey, the Lord Chancellor,
Lord Brougham, Lord St. Leonards, and several
other noble lords. The name of Lord Campbell he
had omitted from the list, inasmuch as that noble
and learned lord would for some time be absent from
town upon circuit. If, however, upon his return the
proceedings of the committee should not have been
brought to a close, he (the Earl of Derby) felt
assured their lordships would be glad to avail them-
selves of the noble and learned lord's great ability
and experience.
The first meeting of the committee was fixed for
Monday next.