The Express.
London, England, 1851-01-03 00:00:00

he Orvrer,A.

TO CORRRSPONnEcrs.
ad,ert.,,,, latest's* tor " 11.• FmareeN• Idedma &Milli pore,
lett,t be We Odle% 111. Beeverieedieet, W Two owe: ea the
day of peb.d..eloa.
MOH WATER AT LONDON DRIDOI.
Tale Dee —Vaddid& 11. ram- ---ANI""4 2b.
l• +our,. —*xis. 331. lAa. --...Addrsaase da. 33a.

LONDON, 711.1041, JANUARY 3.

le the course of some remarks which we lately
took occasion to make on the elaborate scheme of
judiciel reform so oracularly announced by a morning
oontemp.eary, we confined ourselves solely to the pelt-
tics! and constitutional aspect+ of the question. In
this point of view we strongly expressed a decided
objection to centralitiog in the person of one func-
tionary, and that functionary a member of the lees
popular branch of the legislature, those powers and
those administrative duties which ought only to be
exercieed ueder the immedia.e supervision lied con-
trol of the repreeentatives of the people in the Coat
MOUS House of Parliament.
Bet the tenor of our obeervations will have been
each neisepprehend,d if it be for a moment *apposed
that they 'ego- any ins liability on our part to the
urgent necessity for judicial reform, or to 0-.• great
berollt likely to accrue from the existence of a state
officer charged will the superintendence of such
branches of the administration of the law as would
harmooiss with our judicial system. What we op-
posed was retroeressiim under the guise of reform—
the tenets:nos to • cabinet !Moister and a peer, of
those important duties of surveying and reporting
upon the *tats and evlsninistratirn of the law, direct-
ing government reenations, arid advising the crown
in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy.
There are three great objects to be a med at by
thee- who would remodel the existing system of our
ju;inal administration in its highest departments:
the find is to obtain the undivided energies of a first
rate legal fuLctiouary for presiding over our courts
of equity ; the second, to aubetitute a permanent and
satisfactory court of supreme appeal for the present
etc •ssioral and most uneatisfactory tribe' et now
afforded by the lew lords, or as was the case last
setaio^, by the law toil, of the Haase of Peers;
the third re to procure the appointment of a fun.
tionary. charged with those impotent duties of legal
and judiral administration which ere now thrown
male Home Secreteries, who are rarely lawyers, law
officers wl o are very °leen cot states. Len, and legal
members of Hoeol aed Parliamentary comineoions
who barn tenet. time, inclination, nor abiiity fir the
eght performance of those dutes which the skilled
serve., of the ablest man sexing in a permanent
espocity and under the praisera of personal responsi-
hitt, would not be mere than sufficient to diecLarge.
I et the ttole object* thus inilicred, the two :maker,
viz., the npp iintmeot of a chief judge in equ'-y and
the ec netinoion of an I ffective court of appeal, have
hitherto &Inbred the greatest share of attention
sang practical law reformers.
The project fur dividing the legal and poli-
tical inaction of the Chancellor, which has been
of I .te paraded as as original when-, ism far from
isairg new, that in different forms it Ass been softie
and again preeted on the attention of tt e li-F,:ature.
la lft33 Lord BROVUIIAM laid on the table of the
Hone of love.; • hrel and ill-considered bill for ap-
pointing a chief judge in Chancery, and coustiinting
• court of appeal : the measure obviously was one
which would Lot work, and the bill was drooped. In
1,135 a plan for ee:ebli.hing apolitical Lord Cliencel-
lor and a chief
_ jade in nutty was under the consi-
de ration of Lord MEnnouareen governaseet : in 1830
Lord COTTKRDAN broeght in two bills for the mo-
vie- of earryirg this projiict into effect. and for eats-
bli ,ping a court of appeal which should bil provided
over by the Lord Chaeoellor, be enabled to sit after a
pr rogation. and have power to call in the equity
judges to aid ha delineations. Tame bills were met
on &division.
It was in tl 0 coarse of the debete upon this mese '
nre of Lied Corratottraa that Lord LANGDALE
proposed a pin which be never embodied in a bill,
bat of which the following were tho pro.cipal bends:
I. The Lord Chancellor to be confined to judicial
fuectima of wiping/ jurisdiction in the Court of
Chancery—to he' in far, • clf.et judrito in null. 2.
The Ilene of Lords to be a court of appeal ter all,
nub perotonent judges, consisting of • Lord Presi-
dent and I ed. assistant., and with power of sitting
to hear appals neowithstandieg a Foregone*, or
diselotion. 3. A L ird Keeper to bo appointed, with-
out any judicial power, but with the treat seal and
all the poOticel functions, including the appointment
of judges and the nomination of magistrates. Ile oaa,
horde, to be charged with the duty of conductiig
and dirieting ii.quirie a into the state of the law ; pre-
paring and bringing forward all bills intredem d with
the sanction of the government. and examining and
tem/sling on all bills lin nylit into poriOnneet by iatli•
14 Lot modem s if tither boas',
'fide latter portion of Lord LANGDALE'S plan relat-
ing to the appointment ard functions of the Lord
Keeper, is identical in rubstsnee, almost in words,
with the proji ct propounded with all the pomp of an
original discovery in the Tinos a few deys doer.
Of this project we have alreaciy spoken our opinion.
With regard to that part of Lord LUIGDALE'S
satin whirl proposes the establishment of a did'
judge in equity, and the constitution of en effective
and permanent court of copulae appeal, it is entitled
to far more favourable consideration. Toot the Court
of Chancery should be presided over by a permanent
legal fanoionery selected fur that °Co solely with
refire:me to judicial qiiallealuts, may now be
regarded es a point on ohiedi all those who have
dictated attention to the subject are anatimoasly
sassed; we took minion tome time back to record
mr decided opinion io ill favour, areompseied by the
expression of a wish that the hig:i judicial ahiloy of
Lied CIUMWORTII might jet be seemed fur the
country in an office which he is so well qoaliticd to
die-barge. Whether the functiene of the thief judge
la cepity should b, confined, as Lord LAFGDALE
proposed, to matters of original jurinktioc, or
en. deer he should also, as at present, eaurtain sp.
peels from the other eqaity yudgee, is a question
which would very nrieh turn upon the 7:email:Op of
dn.y organising a supreme court of appeal, which
alloald at one i form a tribunal of ultimate retort in
equity, and also absorb to itself the jurisdiction at
rr.S as exercised by the Judicial Committee of the
Privy Council and the Howe of Lords.
So far back as 1833, Sir EDWARD BoODEY—Ito
very rash or iotimperatt law reformer—aneom no! it
a. the deliberre cenvicoon of hie mature experience
Poet "no ef e? ire court of appeal had Sec one a Dec s-
lay which could no lorgerbe dispensed with." Every
ear that Las mimeo intervened must have added
eireogth to that conviction in every mind at all
eine, reset with toe question. It soy were left
arca still required fatten evidence en the point,
tont evidetee mast have been amply supplied by the
session of 1850, when the supreme court of appeal
Or he British empire became mounts in the per-
son of one vivacious and volatile man of 'setae who
lieei to display the range of his versatility Ly ;len-
ino to hear and jades the weightiest of awes is the
brief intervals which he could at atoll fon t e impor-
tunities of political gossip, eked toe urgent claims of a
eientirarious corresposideece. Lord DROCOHAIII was
v 'TT wrath at the irrevinenn with which we then
so..kei of his performance of the appellate (section of
the House of Lords; bat even he, in his calmer mo-
menta, mast admit that, though the judge cn the
`on oine alluded to might be faultless, the jalicial
room could hardly be satisfactory.
Lord LexoneLx s remedy for this s'ate of things
is to here one supreme and virtually reennatent
unit of appeal, with • paid Lord Presideot and two
il
e.. 4 Lade Assistant; the two latter pit Leceesiely 1
4 be peers, but to be set c'ed from amongst loose
errors meet *minor! in the different bean:hes of the
ow to be administered by the Supreme Court.
The crest objectim to this scheme is the expense
it would involve : a simpler, more economical, and