The Express.
London, England, 1865-04-29 00:00:00

COURTS OF JUSTICE BUILDING BILL.

Tu. LORD CRA CEL& olt rid that In rides to move
Ile meod reading of this bill he could sot help upraising
Ye easvietios that their lerdshipe ware now asked to ie.e
their assent to a proposal which was one of the most ism-
Ipertast measures c 1 lemil improvement that be could re.
nesiabm at say period of his experienos. Nothing could be
mere singular, in the rem, state of things in this country,
limn the disregard which had been manifested for so loam •
line of the manner is which our courts of justice were
imentreeted, and of the acoommodatioa afforded for the
proper administration of *Hoc It was Ivry desirable that
themine qnselioos should be viewed br all the courts on the
sameyin** and that there should be one simple and
uniform mode of procedure adopted in all the oourts.
Eisdoableily them divine principles and modes of prow
den had hese to • greet extent perpetuated by the courts
being ia different Mantle& If there were • fres oommuni-
indica of ideas between the practitioners of the different
smuts, which there would be if the courts adjoined oath
ether, that diversity would have a tendency to disappear.
/Isere was a great desire among all persons connected with
lheadmiaistratioe of justice that the present miesioo should
net be allowed to peas without the adoption of some scheme
meshes that oostemplated by thiebdl. Theopposition that bad
ilex years been offered to it had, be was happy to say, almost
e= disappeared. The sockityof Liooolo's-ion, which were
l great typewrote of the immure, were now petitiosers
lot it ; sod he trusted that his noble and learned friend
%gad Et. Leotards) would also withdraw his opposition
boa it. He should he happy indeed if his lordship would
rim" his emotion to it, because he was convinced that of all
Bags that he had known mince he had the honour of be-
Issigim to the profession this undoubtedly was the ea
Zion disked, most needed, and of the greatest promise. In
eisiclasion be moved the wood reading of the bill.
Lord ST. LEONARDS had no objection to the owes-
intim of the law marts. but be did out think it necessary
%remove the Courts of Equity to the proposed site. As
reserded the financial gnostic's, he utaintaieed that the
Court of Chanoery had no right to • single shilling of profit
eat of the funds now in question, which it told in trust for
the beeefit of the suitor. If the measure were carried, it
wield be a most unexampled and dangerous proceeding.
After • few words from the Duke of A ROTLL and Lord
lOR&WWORTR the bill was read a second time. . . .

Their lordships adjourned at 10 minutia to 8 o'clock.

SOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY, Arm 28.
She Brss=>a took the chair at 4 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Oreithend and Kilmarnock Extension Railway ; DimberT,
Battey. and Hecianondwike Water ; East and West Licht
Dock Company.; Fareham Gas ; Landon and South Western
sway (Torrumton exteesioo) ; London. Brighton, sod
&nth Coast Railway (additional powersl; Metropolis
fewer and &hex Reclamation ; Newtown Water ; North
leades, H and Alexandmpark Railway ; Rastrick
Gee ; St. John's ighgateChapel (Porteea) ; and South Essex Railway
11114
GREENOCK RAILWAY BILL.
Yr. E. P. BOUVERIE moved that this lino recom-
mitted to the former committee. He said that a short • inie
leek referees had been appointed, and one of the objects
kir which they were appointed was to investigate sad re-
pret as to the sufficiency or insufficiency lot the estimate
green for the construction of the works. With regard to
the present bill, the referees made a report in which
ambiguous terms were used. They did not say that the
estimate is this use was insufficient, but that
it was vague mad nneatisfactory. On this report the com-
mittee before which the bill was sent came
to the conclusion that the estimate was insufficient, and
Dejected the bill without any investigation of its merits.
Grader thaws circumstances be thought that the bill ought
te be recommitted in order that the real views of the referees
might be ucertained.
The house divided :.

For recommatios the bill llO
Against 76-34
The bill was therefore ordered to be reoommitted.

GLASGOW CITY, SUBURBAN AND HARBOUR