The Express.
London, England, 1851-03-20 00:00:00

EXPENSES OF PROSECUTIONS BILL.
On the order of the day for going into committee on this
bill, several petitions were presented against the sth clause.
(See list of petitions.) The house then want into committee.
Clause I was agreed to.
Oa clause 2.
Mr. HENLEY said he doubted whether the certificate
would include the constable' expenses. He thought it
ought to he made clear in that respect.
Sir O. GREY said it was intended that the words should
include all the experves that were now included in the
certificate. If that was not the ease the words should be
altered so as to make thlt quite clear.
Mr. JICLLINGS observed that in sant^ instances where
the cases were not sent to the session.. nu expenses were
allowed, which he thought a great hardship.
Mr. WAK LEY was glad that the hon. member had
pile l the attention of the Secretary of State to the subject
to which he had referred. It was a ecru important one in-
deed. The law as it stool at present field out a premium
to parties to adopt what was called hard swearing in order
to get a committal for trial. If they succeeded their es-
, pensos were paid, if not they were not paid. It was the
same with reference to medical witnesses, who, in the event
lof a committal, were paid an much per day, but nothing
where the party was acquitted.
Mr. E. B. DENISON feared the clause would open a
door to much expense.
Sir J. DUCKWORTH also made some objection to the

clause.
Mr. BANKES was anxious that the magistrates should
be entrusted with a discretionary power. Cases of this kind
fall very hard on poor persona, when called un to prosecute.
Ile hoped a discretion would he al awed the magistrates to
award rests in eases of misdemeanour.
Mr. W. MILES utjected to the country being called on
to pay the coats in every ease where angry feelings might
prompt parties to go before a grand jury. Still hc would
, have a discretionary power left to the magictrite 1
out this the expense would be enormous.
Mr. DEEDES was also in favour of a discretionary
I power in the court, in cases of misdemeanour.
• Sir O. OltelY observed that the discretionary power at
present only existed in cases of felony, and might be ad-
I vantageously extended beyond those of mentioned in
the act of Oto. IV. In muses of assault with intent and
criminal assault on girls under 10 years of age, this power
might be advantageously; given. It would be better to
fit the cases in which costs should be given, rather than
give an unlimited discretion to the court. As to the sug-
gestion of the ben. gentleman near him (Mr. Wakley) that
costs ,hould he given in owe where there was no com-
mittal, he feared that it would give rise to greater evils than
it would remedy.
Mr. MiLIONI3Y referred to is prevision which he had
brought before the house last session, and said it might be
advantageously incorporated in the bill.
Mr. ‘VAKLEY said he did not recommend the indis-
criminate allowance of costs in all cases of acquittal, but
simply a discretionary power in the maeistrate•s.
After a few words from Mr. liteirre, the clause was
agreed to, as was the following clause.
On clause 4,
Mr. W. MILES said the judge+ of assize had the power
of gruding rewards to officers for extraordinary exertions in
apprehending offenders; but the magistrates at quarter
sessions had only this power in thecae, of receivers of stolen
goods. 'this would be a good opportunity to extend that

nver.
Mr. DEEDES suggerted that provision rhould be made
fur compensation to offivers who received injuries.
Sir ti. OILEY thought the necident of the trial taking
plaer at the searinas or Lariat ought not to deprive the con.'
rtalik of his compenration. The prop' r course appears dto
he to make it a matter of reprew.ntation to the Secretary of
State.

The clause was agreed to.
On clause 5,
Mr. STAFFORD said it would entail a great additional
expt nu to the coanty rates, by taking away the power of
prosecution from a sery deserving class Id professional men
—the clerks to the justices. He therefore moved that the
clause should he omitted.
Mr. BROTIIEII.TON thought it necessary that the
clause should he either omitted or modified.
Lord EBRINGTON thought the whole of this discussion
afforded a fresh illustration of the difficulty of legislation for
local Calreatiell by • central authority. Ile was :toured
that the operation of this clause would be very injurious in
malty places, and he hoped it would be withdrawn.
Sir 0. STRICKL.aND said the most important pOillt was
the exclusion from practice of certain professional men. lie
had received various complaints about this clause, and
thought it required much modification.
Mr. CHRISTOPREIt said the real object of the clause
was to diminish the cost of prosecution., but it would have
a directly opposite effect. lie hoped the clause would be
withdrawn
Mr. l',t(KE, from long experience as a chairman of
quarto r sessions, was confident that if clerks of petty sev-
stuns were prevented prosecuting, justice would not be
done.
Mr COWAN read a letter from a magistrate's clerk,
sh owing that the clause would operate ditenlyantamataly.
lie was an tiolvocatc for paving the clerks by fixed sularisa,
Sir J. TROLLOPE haul never heard any accusation
against justices' clerks; he believed their employment hail
traded to economy of the rates.
Sir 0. OItEY said he had received a great
number of letters, remonstrating against the clerks
to justices twine deprived of the prosecutions. lie
brought no charge against those gentlemen what-
ever; there was no imputation on their character ;
he believed they comprised some of the most respectable
professional men in the country; but there was no doubt a
Ines in the minds of men to increase their charges when
they had an opportunity of doing PO at the public expnse.
It would not be well to constitute the clerks public
prosecutors generally. to the earl usion of: ll other professional
faen; hut it would hi' well to make them liable to conduct
all prosecutions in *bids they might be called on to do so
by the magistrates. Ile therefore proposed that in the
interim, until such salaries were fixed, the clerks should
not be allowed to conduct prosecutions, unit,o specially
called on to do so by the inaginrates. Not being prepared I
to ask the committee to agree to the clause as it stood, he
would allow it to he struck out, and would give notice of
the clause which he should propose as • substitute.
After a few words front 'sir. ANISTEY,
Mr. W. MILES hoped that the right hon. Secretary for
the Horne Department, ni any clause he might introduce,'
would require the certificate of nut only one justice of the
peace, but of the entire bench, as an assurance that attorney
or counsel was nt cessary to prosecute in the particular case.
'floe clause was finally struck out.
On clause 6 being read,
Mr. HOWARD observed that it would be well if the
right hos. gentleman (Sir (i. Grey) determined the amount
of fn's payable to clerks of the peace. In his opinion the
amount ought to be fixed.
Mr. POLES begged to move the insertiou of the following
word., after the words " and to his rights in respect thereof,
" tool that the salary to he paid to any such clerk of the
peace shall not be less than the average amount of the fees,
I profits, and emoluments pity able to such clerk of the peace
in respect of his office, for the three years next preceding
I the paving of this art."
Sir O. tiltEY said the object of the clause was to faeili-
I tate the commutation of fees now received. The measure
had been pressed upon the government; and the committee
which last year out on the subject was unanimous in recom-
I mending that the proposed change should be effected.
The suggestion of the honourab:e gentleman was ob-
jectionable, inasmuch as the fees might be altered
I and diminished at the instance of the justices
of the peace ; and in that row might be he, than in any
or the three year, preceding the alteration. Yet • 'a-
tm equal in amount should he, nevertheless, paid them.
The proposition of Mr. COLEY was understood to have
been withdrawn subsequently, and
Mr. SPOON ER. proposed that the same power be given
in the matter to justices of the peace in boroughs as la
counties. Ile did not sec why justices of boroughs were
not as competent to decide the amount of salary to be paid
be clerks of peace as county justices.
Mr. HENLEY thought it ought to be left to the Secre-
tary of State for the time being Jo act as arbiter in the
ease.
Sir CI, GREY oharreed that there was this difference be-
tween county justices and lattices of borough., that whilst
the former transacted all the fiscal business of their mpre-
tire counties, the fiscal business of the boroughs was trans-
acted by the town councils.
Mr. "SIULLINOS believed much of the expense attendant
on the office of clerk of the peace wan caused by their having I
the duties of the office performed by deputies and absenting
themselves. (Hear.) In some instances these deputies paid
the principals upwards of .900/. a year ; and then, to enable
themselves to make something by the office, they were
obliged to charge for everything, even for summoning the
justices to attend at sessions. In his opinion the clerks of
peace should be compelled to &whoree the duties of their
office in person, 33 also to reside in their respective districts.
(Hear. hear.)
Mr. SPOONER proposed to insert. after "governing
body," in line Si,: the words " and justices of the peace in
special sessions assembled."
Sir 0. GREY said that so the words proposed would not
sispermle the governing laxly, but only secure the ap-
proval of the justices, he did not think the same objection
applied to the present as to the previous amendment. Ile
sight it would he well however, to give come considera-
tion to the matter before the words were adopted.
Sir J. TROLLOP,: wished to know from the right hon.
gentleman whether it was intended to include all the fees
incidental to the tater of clerk of the peace
Sir 0. GREY said that it was intended to include all
fees received by the clerk of the pear.' as clerk of the peace,
but the county rate would not he chargeable for any bust-
' new he might perform as s prof.s 41 man.
The I as arm tole& was agreed to.
On clause 7,
Mr. E. B. DENISON hoped the right hon. gentleman
would take ear, that there should nut be more than one
clerk to • petty woomal division
Sir G. OItEY coal he would take a note of that matter.
The:clause was then agreed to, as were clauses S and 9.
On clause in,
Mr. R. B. DENISoN mid that in the three ridings of
Yorkshire, and in the division. of Lincolnshire, great locos-
! yenience had Ivan experietwed in the magistrates being
obliged to Pend prisoners who were to be tried at the mains
to the county gaol. Ile should, therefore, move a clause, on
the bringing up of the report, to enable the magistrates to
commit such persons to the different houses of correction and
detention.

The clause wu then agreed to, 1116 WI re the remaining
clauses, and the amendments were F. ported to the house.
APPRENTICES AND SERVANTS BILL.
On clause L
Mr. MILES observed that an imprkonment of three
ye.kr, wag a very severe outs. Two )cars was the lbual
tam up tv which a disuctiou was Cowed, and he did not