The Express.
London, England, 1848-09-09 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 9, 1848.

Teo estimators at 1113541 wareproposed by au Robert Peers
nen Dowd T--Tee.
An yam awes* that they were lower than Sir
Graham's proposed estimate, P—l speak trim virus re, to-
'action at such a distaste. forting. I believe Sir Itehart Peel
diminished the estimates 1,000 men.
Who was at the Admiralty at that dal. P—Lord de Orey.
Do you remsonbcr who wattle Janice lords T—Str °carpi
Cockburn was sppalited first naval lord, bet he was coup
matsdiop in the West Indies ; Sir John Bamford we. neat,
Sir Chariot Rowley scut, and then there wee ono civil lord,
Lard Ashley.
Tbey must have supposed that the estimates were more
thaw suoticient whew they reduced them 1-1 think it wool.;
ha hardly fair to call arm me tolls* an opinion as to the
awadnot of 'enthrals with whom I was not in the habit of
weensausicatios or cm,fldsucoo. I apprehend Sir Robert Peet
Huse into dike with as mitorrse weavrily its the House of
CONIIIOO/111, Oltai he thought the safest thino he could do was
to take his predecessor'. Minors, dimisishisg 14 o Was,
ass then he could be pretty ewe of pawing it through the
Hons. if COMPIOO/18.

Here, then, wo have a British admiral for several
successive years giving his unction to estimate.
which he was in private denouncing as c ticuluted to
ruin the navy. He consents to be an accomplice in
raining the navy (as he Ix Hover) in order that he
may hold his precarious office at the navy. board till
"things might change for the better;" s. e. till he
could get himself snugly moored in the p:rmauent
appointment of Orienwich Hospital, whither he was
" extremely glad "to go. And lure we have '
other British admiral declaring that be "perfectly
understands" such conduct, and thinks it all quite
right. Moreover, we have this same second British
admiral attributing to the minister under whoa he
subsequently accepted office, the mean and un-
principled tactics of taking estimates which he
thought already too low and di, inishing them
still farther to curry favour with the House of Com-
mons. .Until we have better evidence we will not
impute to any other of the persons named in the above
quotation the conduct attributed to them, but that
Admirals HARDY and BOWLEB held and acted upon
such loose and equivocal principles of morality is clear
from the acts of the first, and teem the acts and &do-
rations of the second.

There is an important practical lesson to be de-
duced from such revelations as we have now b en
passing in review. A stook subject for turgid decla-
mation and stale jokes with the 21tnes, 01. he, end
other re-actionist journals, at present is, what they
call the infatuation and presumption f Mr. Gou
rmet, in declaring that it is possible to make
reductions in our military and naval expenditure. We
are told that the whole weight of official men—the
testimony of all who have experience in these mat-
ters—is against Mr. Commit. The quotations from
the evidence of two official men before the committee

on navy, army, and ordnance estimates, show what
this official or professional testimony is really worth.
Admiral Bow Les bears witness that, notwithstanding
the clamour against redactions in the naval expendi-
ture, offirors high in the service have equalled at such
rel. odious from interested motive., and that he justi-
fies their conduct. What is the value of
the testimony of men who, upon principle,
will say one thing at one time and another
at another, according u it subserves their in-
terests ? Lord AUCKLAND betrays a superficial
acquaintance with the business of his own department,
falls into the most glaring contrad,ctioos, and then
seeks to shroud himself in the mystery of affected
official reserve. The justice and sound common sense
of the views propounded by Mr. COBDEN are not to be
pooh pooped and discredited by such authorities, nor
by their shall w echoes in the press.

If would tot be altogether fair to review the legis-
lative business of the session in the Lords as we have
dace that which has been trateacted in the Coirmnis.
The Lords plead that they have been waiting to have
business sent them from the Commons. But the
Lords have had their judicial business entirely under
their own control.

The House of Lords sat altogether 136 days during
the eession—a monster session—beginning on the 18th
of November, 1847, and ending the 6th of the pre-
sent month. Their lordships heard appeals and writs
of error on 64 of these days, beginning on the 10. h of
February, their 24th sitting, and stopping on the 3rd
of August. In that time they heard and finally dis-
posed of 31 causes, and heard fully, without deciding,
more. Among these 8 were "the Attorney-Oeuerel
e. Drummond," an appeal front Ireland, which
occupied their lord-hips five days in hearing ;
" Rowley r. Adams," an English appeal, which
occupied as many mote days in the bearing;
the " Attorney-General e. Cox, another English ap-
peal relating to the assets of the late Duke of YORK,
which took three days to hear ; and " Doe dem.
Daniel e. Woodroffe," a writ of error, the hearing of
which took throe days more. Their lordships, how-
ever, as if to make up for this arrear of cases, which
them stand over till next session for judgment, pr
seemed judgments in thirteen other important causes,
heard in the sessions of 1846 and 1847. These 13,
added to the 31 heard and disposed of this service,
make together 44 causes finally determined, a larger
number than usually happens to be heard and decided
in any one session.
It is just to the Loan CHANCELLOR to observe,
that though it is the Hones of Lords that
gets the credit of this work, and the deci-
sions are entitled the judgments of the house, and
as such receive weight and authority in the courts,
the labour and the responsibility fall chiefly on his
lordship. It may well be mid of the Lords also, se it
has been of the Commons, that talking is a great ob-
struction and hindrance to business, especially to judi-
cial business; but this talking is not the LORD CHAN-
csumes, but that of learned counsel, whose wonder-
ful power can expand an argument on a aarro v point
over several days. This is an evil which must bo en-
dured as long as fees are paid by the day, and not by
the cause, as they are in all the law and equity courts.
It is no wonder that such a practice begets " long
causes ;" indeed, the wonder is that we do not oftener
hear of • monster cause, like " Attwood e. Small,"
which consumed eighteen long days of the session
01835, and thirty of the then next session, in ar-
guments.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, though • " speaker " by
his offioe, is not a great talker—certainly not a loud
one—which is often much to be regretted ; but his
lordship ia the best, the most flattering listener that
the talkers could desire, and by his patient endurance
and hearing out without interrupting he got through
the greater part of the causes in .the Lords; and
" alone he did it," for the other law lords did not joint
him in the early ptrt of the session ; and when they
did their presence did not accelerate the progress of
business or lighten it much. Lord BROUGHAM, indeed,
did sit as Speaker for three out of the 64 days
during the hearing of the writ of error in " Doe e.
Woodroffe," in the presence of the common law
judges.
Divorce bills also occupied several days; and be
it observed that these, from the hearing of the evi
denoe in support of the allegations in their preambles,
which is done before the second reading of the bills,
are as much matters of judicial cognisance and pie-
cedure, governed by the same rules of law and
evidence, as causes are. There were eight such bills
last session, four of which were passed by both
houses; the other four did not pass the Lords.
Two of these latter,—Mrs. DAWSON'S divorce bill,
and Miss FIELD'S Nullity of Marriage Bill, took seve-
ral days. The former failed, perhaps because it did
not appear, so it is supposed, that the lady had had
cruelty enough. Her bill, however, is not with-
drawn. Her friends did not venture to urge the se.
Gad reading of it, and they or she may mend the
ease by improving_ her grievances before next
aeries. Miss FIELD'S case was brought
Wiwi with greater confidence and assurance of
eerie= j bat parturient montes, mascitur, &c. A speech
et her horns from Sir FITZROY KELLY, overflowing
with his touching pathos and imploring appeals to
venerable peers as fathers, brothers, relatives, and
, guardians of orphan young ladies, met with a most
provoking extinguisher in a few plain observations
from Lord Davos, who, in that matter, sat as Speaker
kneed of the LORD CHANCELLOR. The case in its
progress turned out to be, in fart, an ejectment cause
of " Smith v. Brown," the latter being the young
lady's husband, and SMITH being the promoter of the
I bill, who, upon his examination in support of it,
very ingenuously confessed that he would have no
objection to his eon's taking for a wife a young lady
of 18 with a fortune exceeding 1,0001. • year, mean-
ing Miss FIELD.
In enumerating the judicial business of t"-e Lords,
the peerage oases must not be overlooked. Thrre
were eleven of them before the house in the course of
the session. Six of them—beir g on petitions to the
house itself, presented by Irish peers, claiming, on
coming of age or to the title, to be admitted to vote
at the elections of Irish representative peers—did not

meth time Is the production of the necessary
creep)ptoo before the committee of privileges. The other I
five were of a different nature, being upon petitions
to the Queen. raying after long lame of time to be '
admitted to their !ids', and referred by her MAJESTY
to the house, and by the hones to the committee of
privileges to inquire and report to her MA-
IasTY. Of these five claim'', two only—viz.
the barony of Says -nd Bele, and
earldom of Crawford, with the barony of Lindsay,
were disposed of finally and reported as made
out. The claim to the earldom of Perth was re-
ported as not made out, but the claimant will no doubt
mend his case and come again ; an ex-duke in France
is not likely to give up a lair chance of keeping op
his nobility in an ancient Scotch dignity. The
Southesk peerage ease was only opened, and was in
the opening nipped, the circumstences of it falling
within the law that ruled the Perth ease. What i.
to be said of the fifth and last of the peerages—the
never-ending caso of the Visouunt TRACY P That case
has occupied much of the time of the house since
1836. Of t e curious proceedings in it—its favour-
able app.srance one day and cloudy aspect
the next—the Daily News has furnished reports to its
readers from time to time during the last three
sessions, and therein have also been duly recorded the
history, progress, and end of the other peerages, and
of the divorce bills, and of the causes as they occurred.
There are now remaining for the judicial work of
next session the eight cruses before-mentioned as
heard, to be decided; there are also two causes set
down for hearing in a former session, and which may
be considered in arrear; and there are thirty-six more
came a set down during the session just euded, and,
therefore, ripe for hearing in the next. Of these
causes, twenty-five are from Scotland, and six from
Ireland. The hearing and deciding the thirty
six, in addition to the other eight and two, would be
fair work for next session, with the divorces and
claims of peerage which may yet arise. But there
were also entered in the last and previous sessions
between 70 and 80 other appeals and writs of error,
aurae of which will, of course, be set down and brought
on for hearing in the next.
It may be useful, as well as curious, to compare the
work of last session, as to causes, with former sessions
in which the most business of that sort was done. In
1824, when Lord (iIFFORD, then Master of the Rolls,
was sent up to the house to get rid of the arrears of
Scotch appeals, the house sat for that purpose 79 days,
bevel 94 can-es—most of them Scotch—left 7 of
them undecided and 142 unheard. In 1825, the
house, with the assistance of the same learned lord,
sat judicially 84 days and heard 92 causes, leaving 7
of them undecided, and an arrear of 77 causes un-
heard. In 182'-7, after Lord GIFFORD'S death, the
house, with Lord LYNDHURST then chancellor, and
with the assistance of Lords ELDON and REDEi-
DALE, sat judicially 58 days, heard 58 musts, leaving
6of them undecided, and an arrear of 74 unheard. In
1828 the house sat 63 days on causes, heard 40, left
one of them over for judgment, and 78 unheard. In
1831, the first erosion of Lord BROUGIIAM, chancellor,
43 days were given to causes, 49 were heard, 4 of
them were left undecided, and 56 more unheard. In
1834 the house sat ore causes 58 days, heard 56, leay.
ing 3 of them undisposed of and 75 more
unheard. In 1835, after Lord Baca :GUAM resigned
the great seal, the house eat judicially under
his lordship's presidency (the great seal being for part
of that session in commission) 80 days, hearts 64
causes, lett five of them undecided, and 38 only
unheard—the smallest arrear known for many years
before, and which has been increasing ever since. It
may be remembered that it was principally owing to
the bodily and mental fatigue of that session's work
that Lord BROUGHAM'S health was so much damaged
that he was obliged to remain at his country seat the
wnole of the session of 1836. The judicial sittings of
the house since 1835 have not exce. ded in any session
74 days ; that being the number in 1840 and in 1842,
under the respective chancellorships of Lord COTTEN-
HAM and Lord LYNDTIURtiT. Forty causes only were
heard in 1840, and 16 of them were left undecided,
and 71 more unheard. The number heard in 1842
was 48, of which 10 were left undecided, with an
arrearof 77 unheard. So that the judicial labours of
the session just ended approach nearest to the hercu-
lean labours of the house, with Lord BROUGHAM
presicli g, in 1836; and allowance must also be made
for the other judicial duties of the LORD CHANCELLOR
during the session.

IN another column will be found a letterfro:n a

correspondent in Cork, curium for its historical
reminiscences, and interesting as showing the expec-
tations which Lord Joint RUSSELL'S visit to Ireland
has excited even among intelligent and reflecting
Irishmen.

Our correspondent himself will by this time have
been made aware that Lord JOHN does not seem to
have contemplated ingratiating himself with what is
hearty and impulsive ie Irish society, and that instead
of courting he has rather held back from it. Whether
Lord Join es excursion to Dublin had any concealed
political object in view remains, and possibly may
always remain, a " cabinet secret." We feel marvel-
lous little curiosity about the matter ; and this lack of
curiosity appears to be plentifully participated in by
the public, at large.
Of the "reconstruction" of the Irish liberal party,
either in consequence of Lord JOHN'S visit, or from
any other canoe, we have but slender hopes. Our in-
formation from the sister island, however, is sack as
to convince os that there has rarely been a
time when the really intelligent and patriotic
proprietary class in that country had abetter opportu-
nity of asserting their natural influence in its political
movements, or with more wholesome effect. All
personal prestige has been dissipated to the four winds
of heaven. And though the mass of the population
have shown themselves sadly credulous and gullible
in their choice of leaders, we think that amid even
their most aimless and fantastic straggles there are
indications of real progress on the part of the Irish
people. The concurrent testimony of intelligent
Irishmen, who have re-visited their country after a
lapse of years, is to the effect that there
ant marked improvements in the dwellings and
dress of the peasantry, and in the cultivation
of the soil. This is a point of which only Irishmen
(and perhaps Sootchmen) can be fair judges : Rog-
lishmen test both be an unfair standard—by compari-
son with the mach more advanced condition of Eng-
land. Even the altered bearing of the peasantry,
which impresses so many Irishmen of the old school
unity:, y, we are disposed to hail as a good omen.
What they call loss of proper respect for the upper
classes ap to us no more than a sense of their
own w , and an exchange of fawning servility for
simple civility.
Now that the bubble of incendiary agitation has
bunt, and that intelligence and productive industry
are making progress among the people, is the time for
the educated proprietary class to take their proper
position in Ireland. But that they will do so is more
than we will venture to affirm.