The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-02-08 00:00:00

ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS,

Mr. COLLIER moved for leave to bring in a bill to transfer
the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts to the Superior
Courts of Common Law. He contended that the Common
Law Courts were quite sufficient for the dispensing of justice,
and he proposed that all cases where small sums were involved,
no matter what, or will cases, where there existed no difference,
should be referred to the county courts. Ho proposed to
make arrangements in every county court district for carrying
out this improvement, and that all wills should be deposited
at the Registrar General's office, at Somerset-house, where
there was room to contain all wills for the next 500 years.
With regard to cases where the sum involved amounted to
more than £3OO, be did not propose than' any
new court should be established for the purpose of
considering such cases, but that they should be referred to the
superior Courts of Common Law. He preferred the Court
of Common Pleas, as having least business. These courts
would have power to deal with cases of personalty as well as

realty. As regarded the proctors, they would emerge horn
Doctors Commons into the light of day; and he had no doubt
that their business would be considerably increased. Much
saving of expense and litigation would be gained by this
measure, and the course of justice would be facilitated.
Mr. HADFIELD secon led the motion. lie was glad to find
that an attempt was made to simplify the law relating to pro-
bates, and by the bill now proposed, a man would only require
one instead of five documents to administer his affairs. He
complained that the affairs of the Ecclesiastical Court were
shamefully mismanaged, and that a ley. gentleman was now,
and had been for a number of years, in possession of a sinecure
of £B,OOO, which was obtained, not from the consolidated fund,
but from bereaved families, widows, and orphans.
Mr. G. BUTT said, it was very generally admitted that an
alteration of the law on the subject of testamentary jurisdiction
was necessary, but he did not think the measure proposed by
the honourable member for Plymouth Would be of much
advantage.
The SJLICITOR GENERAL would not Oppose the introduction
of the measure, though he was of opinion that the bill would
❑ot be of much advantage, as it clearly transferred the evils
from one tribunal to another. B,e, however, approved of the
principle, that in testamentary cases of small estates, the infe-
rior courts of common law should be used. It was the intention
of the Government, in the course of the present session, to
Wing in a bill on the subject of testamentary jurisdiction, which
would not abolish the Ecclesiastical Courts, but would com-
pletely alter their arrangements.

Mi. SEATING was glad that the government was about to
bring in a measure on this important subject.
Mr. MALINS objected to the bill proposed by Mr. Collier,
on the ground that, by referring will cases of small amount
to the County Courts, they would be under the jurisdiction o
Judges, who perhaps had no knowledge on the subject of
thawing up wils.

Mr. ATHERTON gave his support to the measure under dis-
cussion, and stated his opinion that the County Court Judges
would be found competent to adjudicate upon small will cases.
Mr. R. PHILLIMORE defended the Ecclesiastical Courts,
declaring that they had been unjustly censured. Ho hoped,
as the government had promised an extensive maftire this
session, that they would not bring it in, and then withdraw it,
but would stand or fall by it. The question had been agitated
for the last 30 years, and he hoped at last to see it settled.
Atter a few words from Mr. Mutirz,
Sir E. PERRY defended the bill, and remarked that it was
monstrous to suppose that a county court judge, with the
assistance of a jury, if the parties required, would not be com-
petent to decide upon any case that came before him.
Mr. M`M.sitox and Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE having spoken
in support of the motion,
Mr. COLLIER replied, and leave was granted to bring in the
bill.

NAVAL PATRONAGE AND PROMOTIONS.
Captain &OBELI. moved for a select committee to enquire
into the naval administration, and the list of officer's patron-
age, promotions, and retirements, and the efficiency of the
service in all the grades belonging to it. The honourable and
gallant member dwelt upon the subject of promotion by pur-
chase in the army, quoting documents to show that those who
got on rapidly had mostly aristocratic names, and
observed that the first defect in the system
is the appointment of First Lords in the Admiralty, who were
not sailers, and could not therefore understand naval affairs.
He then made a reference to to the state of the navy, urging
upon the Go.vernment the necessity for increasing the bounty,
' in order to obtain men, and to prevent British seamen from
entering the service of foreign countries. If the Government
did not at once render our marine service efficient, they
would perhaps in a short time find it too late. In the event
of awar with America now taking Plan;
we should be pretty
safe, as she was not in a position to carry on a war by
sea, but if such a misfortune occurred in a few years time
they might depend upon it that she would have a large and
well manned fleet to bring down upon us.
Admiral WALCOTT seconded the motion. Enquiries had
been made by the committees, sitting
on Crimean matters,
into the administration of the army, and they asked for
similar enquiry should be made into the administration of
the naty.

Sir CHARLES WOOD said that notwithstanding the speech
of the hon. and gallant gentleman, he saw no reason to change
the opinion which he expressed last session with regard to
naval administration. The right hon. bart, prooooto4 to