The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-05-28 00:00:00

another Be.. assoopaid they alti:sarldratisisls of the Duke
of York I hit sild lb.* le* y owed his tailor
MOM I don. corm Odd goo olacandoit of dome Illiessioas
Wields* is doslOightg diets dm hotpwasewelf_ Mk& t
woo as be mai tar the mow ere hou. ots hod ow
se the goo So Oa Anima Of LW; 4:arrith respect
lc muse yam who woo, to osi the dr the
Chasollue of *a irodompm. ',is loots posits y to the
00111.1. tor ftraw~ far Ms sit tollligs ' He thought
IMO.. a sadist he do Puke of Cumberland
riot 1:110 . , „
......11 ma oht ism
ll= dr Raise mem
wpm. a yea". hi terlebat he baba
Peeweest. h ooklem. abet alter the forma discussion he went
ahrasil *I , ha wits riffit Is withdrawing himself from the
a ~., Old why In God's name make any exertion to
I • err, hear.) The Resolution as it then stood
11111.11•0004 deli 11So it 11111% the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
es he said the Mahe fur Z. Knatchbull) Pad no inten-
der pp deceive Wee' eseurity was there, that the
iteßtira bibs eollodPfor could
tt
gryarevnt
tun be
ccoonn..
• it bs esseteast au . tion of the young prince
4) An ebernatille Wit bees made as to the thinness
%2
_... ti *me. lei am • • deduced from it in support
ol /*les hi sibs the absence of Members
Mit
toad lloilennileolf slot 11/11 ili. He did not himself know
a it.. and is amid this moarable Gentleman opposite,
that sf thozoledsigidas sun persevered in, the House would
be' min embers to oppose it- Even many on the
°tlo3 ie would oat be farad wnious to sttj,port it, when they
fou r laisbou patting their hoods in the public purse. (Cries of
"Fkoo, heal If he remands* Jitti.:y, there was something
flai4 as to the RoyalThlte's halftones's' tel with other children.
If so, there wee sonic other postbn for them. At all events,
these ewere of a different stock (a laugh), and had no connexion
with this country. For the.. TWOS. he should vote for the fine
grant, and oppose the mood, sod he trusted a mejority of the
Huuse would come to the sassassoduslon, when they saw such a
reckless wasted' the public mow. (How, hear.)
Sir J. AIARJORIBA NIES did not mean by what he said that
tehef should be granted to the Royal Duke; he looked on is grant
to him not es a relief, but a mere Sc'. of justice to one who con-
tributed to raise to its present high station the military glory of
the country.
Mr. Secretary CANNING false. from the low tone in which the
Right Honourable Gentleman commenced, his first sentences were
nearly inaudible. We undensood -bim to toky-1 think it. Sir,
extremely uofair to have the claims and modes*, ding imam
of the Royal Family, who are not properly before the one, dis.
cussed, as they hive been this eveaing—(Aar,hear)—to have the
propriety of grants being made to them canvassed on the suppo-
sition that grants have been proposed. I repeat. Sir, that It is
most unfair, that oo the memo of a grant being moved to
one branch of the Royal Family, the claims of another should be
mooted. I confess, that if the claims of that illustrious individual
were fairly before the House, such a course would be perfectly
justifiable. An Honourable Member opposite seems to insinuate
that some indiscreet friend of theoDuke of York took the oppor-
tunity of what he thought the vein of liberality which pervaded the
House, in bringing forward the proposition for giving an increased
allowance to the Royal Duke. It was not so, Sir ; this subject
was started by another Honourable Member not now pre-
sent, who, when discussing the giant for educating the
Duke of Cumberland's son, said that if so much money were
to be given away, he would rather expend it in paying the debts of
the Duke of I or*. (Hear, hear ). Then arose the discussion
whether such a grant would be fair or not. The question was
argued with as much earnestness as if his Royal Highness were
actually before the House twebrrna pauperise. (Hear, hear.) With
respect, Sir, to the two grants proposed by my Right lion. Friend,
I think it some consolation that I need not advance anything in
.support of the first ; indeed it would be a waste of words to argue
the propriety of it, as all parties look on it as souse act of justice
rather than munificence; his Mejesty's Government rather re-
ceive blame that they have not proposed it sooner, and that it was
less than it ought to be. (Hear.) On the Duchess of Kent no
greater praise could be bestowed, than that an individual standing
in the rank she did should lead so quiet, retired, and I may add,
unobtrusive a life—that an individual sustaining so high a
station in this Loamy should be known but to few, scarcely
seen by any ; certainly never putting herself forward to the rouble
gaze—always attending to the instruction of this child, for
whose education we are now providing. (Hear, hear.) With
respect to the awed grant, there seems to be an objection raised
from some ill feeling to the Duke of Cumberland. For my own part
I confess I would rather that the House should look on it, not as a
grant to the Duke of Cumberland, but one for the education of his
son, a Prince next to the daughter of the Duchess of Kent in
proximity to the throne. To this grant two objections are ad.
!aimed-Ist. '1 hat the father and son ea abroad ; that the money
now to be paid may perhaps be spent abroad. On the other hand,
he urged that hisoyal Highness was so odious as not to deserve
it, and that they would never wish to see him established in this
country. This certainly is an unjust view of it. The object of the
grant, Sir, is to secure to his son dust education which it is befitting
a Prince standing in relation to the throne should have—a Prince
too who stands in "remoter proximity to the Crown." I use
the words, although my Right lion. Friend (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) was supposed to use them in rather a blundering man-
ner: largo, or rather /ongiori pros-boos istersitlki, though perhaps
it contains a seeming contradiction, is. I ten sure, intelligible to
the titmice' scholar. It implies a proximity something more re-
mote. My Right lime Friend is asked if he can give any security
that the object of the grant shall be carried into effect ? Undoubt-
edly. What is to be the result of the motion, if agreed to? Why
to enable the ling to issue a certain sum foe the education of this
young Prince. It is, then, I say, the dety of his Majesty's Mi-
nisters to advise that no money be isaged unless for the purpose for
which it was voted. His Right lion. Friend was also asked if the
Royal parents were to return to this country with their child /
a circumstance which he certainly could not know, nor indeed
would it be fair in him to ask a question on the subject. tVe call,
Sir, on the House to place the vote in the hands of the Crown, and
it will be the duty of Ministers to see that not one shilling of it
be expaided unless the child be brought to this country to receive
hid education. (Hear, hear.) We ate asked whether the father
will follow the child ? Again I answer, we do not know. I cer-
tainly recollect, if my memory do not fail me, though I think it
fair to say that I have not refreshed it by any reference, that when
a grant was filet proposed to be made to the Duke of Cumberland,
the question was argued ex ready on the disapprobation which his
marriage generally met with. (Hear, hear.) When a subsequent
application was made, it was refused on the ground of the former
refusal, the basis of which was as I have mentioned ; if, then, on
the second application, he found there was a lurking secret dis-
like to him, was it astonishing that he should leave the country 2
%%Then he found, too, that the sum allotted him by Parliament was
not sufficient to enable him to support his wife and establishment
in a style of dignity equal to his Royal brothers, was it a matter of
astonishment that he should seek privacy in another country ? Un.
doubtedly it would have been the first object and pride of the Duke
of Cumberland to place his wife and family in that country to which
he was attached by every tie of blood acid inclination; but I cannot
say it was not natural he should go to that other country, which,
under all the circunistancee, mutt have been niore agreeable to his
wife and himself, and in :hat country we now find him living with
his wife, and a child born subsequent to the refusal of any further Par-
liamentary provision for the increased expenditure required upon
his marriage—with a child, I say, in the direct line to the throne
of this kingdom, and of an age which demands our attention to its
future maintenance and education. if, then, the Duke of Cum-
berland resides abroad from some reasons which I know not—in the
name of God, I say, rescue the child. If he resides abroad from
an inability to support his wife and child in this country in a man-
ner adequate to their rank, remove that impediment. Our business
is to secure a future King to be educated in this kingdom. For
that purpose his Majesty's Al inisters have made this application to
Parliament, and they take upon themselves the ususl responsibility
that the sum they require shall be applied to the education of the
child ; and I think, from the advantage' attendant upon such a
course of proceeding, they are bound so catty that resolution iota
effect.
Sir C. FORBES defended the course recommended by Ministers,
and attributed the hostility displayed by the Opposition on the
subject of this grant, to the Duke of Cumberland's having assisted
to throw out the Talents. The Duchess of Kent ought to have
been provided for long since. lie thought it a scandalous thing
that she should be, as it had been reported, left dependent upon
the bounty of her brother, the Prince of Saxe Coburg.
Mr. J. IV 11.1.1 A AIS thought that the thin attendance upon the
Opposition benches was a sufficient Ew* n. to the assertion of the
Hon. Baronet on the subject of party hostility. Leaving out how.
ever all the questions which had been mixed up with the debate
upon the grants, he was of opinion that great injustice had been
done to the Duchess of Kent in leaving her with only 6,000/.
a-year, when the Duke of Cumberland had 18.0001. To the grant
to the Duchess therefore he would make no objection ; but he would
not consent to any additional allowance for even the education of
the child of the Duke of Cumberland, until he saw the Duke fairly
landed on English ground. If therefore his Hon. Friend pressed
his amendment, and would take the sense of the (louse upon the
question of 111,0001. a-year being enough for the maintenance
of the Duke of Comte:lend and his family, he ale:mid have his
su7ll7en.Resolution that it was expedient to grant 6,0001. to the
Duchess of Kent for the maintenance and education of the Prin-
cess Alexandrine, was then put and carried.
On the question that a sum of 9.0001. be granted to the Duke of
Cumberland for the education aid maintenance of the young Prince
George,
Mr. GIPPS moved that the words " in Great Britain" be
added.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that after
the unequivocal assurance that this grant was not asked for under
any false pretences, but for the bone fide education of the child of
the Duke of Cumberland in this country, he could not perceive any
reasons for the amendment proposed, unless the House thought
that his Majesty's Minister' were not about to act with good faith,
and that they did not Intend to abide by their declarations.
Such an addition to the Resolution could only imply a doubt, either
that the Ministers would not watch over the application of the
money, or that the Duke of Cumberland would not be disposed to
comply with the terms of the grant. In either case the House had
it in its power at any time to institute an inquiry into the applica-
tion of the money. Looking upoo the power thus vested in the
House, and feeling conscious of there being no grounds fat imput-
ing any false pretences to his Majesty's Ministers, he would oppose
the amendment.
Hr. J. P. GRANT would be the last man to impute any thing
like a deflaration of false pretences to the Right lion. Gentle-
man, or to charge him with an intention to deceive the House;
but wit the Right lien. Gentleman sure of his place ?—(hear)—

Il

-,, .
~: ~„

-old be IMMIX for the ecmdate ebribilltagt 011titht
succeed him ? A variety of eidee would
have the effect of depriving the blight Hon. Geellba=6"if his
per; end if the Duke of Cumberland shield beef
as not to comply with the conditions of the grant, whet Might
be said by any future Minister, If • Member rose In that Hoare to
complain of that failure of engagement? (Hear, hear.) Weald he
not my. "I am ao party to any such understanding (hear).—
1 WTI not bound by any engagement?" and would he not point
triumphantly to their Journals, as cornainlng the naked anquaiilied
vote, without any explanation? (Hear, bear.) The money was la_
tended to be applied solely to the education of the son of the Duke
in this country; and he thought that online they inserted such
words as would clearly point out their intention, there would be
nothing binding, either on future Ministers or on his Royal
Highness.
Mr. R. MARTIN defended the grant, and thought the Doke
shetild bare 'eempensation for the refute' of on inidition to Ida
income on the former occasion,
Lord BINNING would vote for the grant, on the ground stated
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was intended to enable
the Duke to educate his child honourably, and he would object
to any eildirional words, which might convey an appearance that I
the House did not confide in the integrity of Ministers. or that
it suspected unfair dealings on the part of the Duke. Nut such
terms were coupled with any other grant t and this might place
the child of his Royal Highness in a eery unpleasant rimer_
tine, as it would become a very questionable matter whether the
young Prince could be conveyed oat if this country for even
a few weeks, to prelusive his health without the consent of Par.,
Sir J. NEVI PORT had no doubt of the sincerity of his Masi
jetty's Ministers in their professions on this subject; but as their
abject was to 'void the evils of a foreign eduCation, and u MI.
Lobsters conld only answer for themselves, but not for the Dune,
110 would object to any accession to his Royal Highness's in.
enme, unless for the express purpose of educating his child in
Great Britain (hear, hear); and he would secure the performance
of that condition he entering the reason of the ;swot upon the
Journals. The Right lion. Gentleman, (the Chancellor of the Ex.
equer,) had told them they might afterwards compel the perform.
ant/ of the covenant ; but he considered it better to establish their
Meese, Ilketly now than be compelled after wards to retrace their
RHSKISSON apprehended that it was the first time Par-
liament had attempted to point out to the Crown the partindar
method of applying money for the education of the Royal Family.
however the House disapproved at any time of the course pur.
wad, they might institute an inquiry by calling fur the warrant
iwhich was issued to procure payment •of the money. He agreed
with the Noble Lord (Lord Binning) upon the strength of the
objection he had urged to the want of a power for the removal of the
elidd from this country in ease of illness even for three weeks; and
Mentended with him, that the introduction of the words in the resin.
&Rion would render the consent of Parliament necessary to such a
petnovall. Ile did not know that it would be inexpedient to put
home declaration as to the education in Great Britain into the pee.
feeble of the Bill, which would follow the resolution, (hear. hewn)
because that would sufficiently point out the motive of the grant
Without making its terms so imperative. Something was, lie con.
tender'., to be allowed for the feelings of the Duke of Cumberland,
that his child should be properly educated, and he would therefore
vote for the Resolution, because he believed the terms would be
strictly fulfilled.
Dr. LUSH INGTON had no douot the terms would be fulfilled
now; hut as they had heard the Hon. Baronet (Sir C. Forbes) talk
of the Duke's assistance in bringing in a " No Popery" administra.
tion, was it not to be feared, that if ever an administration wholly
of that party—a thing not now improbable—was formed, it to ht,
out of gratitude to the Duke, no; be very particular in its inquiries
as to the method cf applying the grant. Ile was not therefore pre-
pared to give to the Choncellor's soccemor the power of paying the
money without any condition. nor to admit the Duke to dole out
the sum granted for the education of his child in any manner he
might think proper, and make the Crown the mere conduit-pipe
through which the 6,000/. were to pass without any contract as to its
application. Ile would not trust the Duke of Cumberland, and he
had heard nothing which could induce Parliament to alter the opl.
Mon it had formed in 1816, that the Duke had not, nor did not,
deserve the confidence of the country. The Duke of Cumberland
had 19,0001. a year, while the Duchess of Kent had but 6.0001. r• if
they gave the Duchess 12,0001. it would then leave the Duke LOW.
more than the Duchess was allowed for herself and het daughter.
He could not perceive why there should exist that difference be.
tween the allowance male to the Duchess of Kent for the educed=
of her Princess, and that now proposed to be granted to the Duke
of Cumberland for the education of his son. But twelve thousand
pounds a year it seemed was amply sufficient for the Duchess of
Kent, who, with her daughter, continually resided in this country,
and yet it was deemed necessary to increase the allowance to the
Duke of Cumberland to 24,0001. a year, although the Duke resided
abroad, and there was no probability of his ever coming to live
permanently in England. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite,
(Mr. Canning) had said it was very natural that the Duke of COD.
bcrland should prefer residing abroad. He (Be. Lushingtor))
thought so too (hear, hear); and there were some very cog ftra
reasons why the Duke should have this preference. But wherever
hit Royal Highness might be disposed to live, he tire&
it absolutely a duty on the part of the Legislature Ma
take care that the young Prince should be educated in Enghted,
and unless, therefore, the grant were made upon that condition, he
should object to the motion. Ht thought that 6,000!. a-year fbt
the purpose of procuring that education was a great stun, and that
Parliament was going to the extent of its liberality in granting It;
and if it should ultimately make the grant, he thought it by no
means an important point to secure its being properly appro.
priated.
Mr. T. WILSON said there appeared to be a great dilate:we of
opinion as to the propriety of the grant being made, as by
the Resolntion, as it was doubtful whether the sum • ed
would be entirely appropriated to its specific purposesiteWlNalher
it was to be as an increase to the Parliamentary grant already mob
to the Duke of Cumberland ; and which increase had on a former
occasion been refused. He thought. therefore, that unless it was
monody stated in what manner the sum now proposed to be
granted should be appropriated, the House would, by agreeing to I
the Resolution, in effect be saying, that the House of Commas
was wrong in its former rejection of the proposed increase. what'll'
showing that it was right in making that increase now. He thew
fore could not help concurring in the amendment, because he con.
sidered the Parliament was best performing its duty in marking the
precise object for which this sum was to be granted.
Mr. C. W. WYNN observed that as he had been one of those
who joined in opposing the motions for granting an additional sum
to the Duke of Cumberland on the former occasions, he felt it tie.
ecstasy to explain his motives for supporting the motion on the
present. lie did not think that by doing this he was in the slightest
degree acting inconsistent with the votes he gave in rejection of the
former grants ; on the contrary, he thought his conduct would be
quite consistent. It was, he remembered, said by those who
supported the motions on the former occasions, that the grant
was as much for the children which the Duke might have ae
for the Duke himself, and the answer given to that was, that
if there should be any children of the marriage of the Royal
Duke, it would then be the duty of Parliament to make a province
for them. That pledge the House was now called upon to redeem,
and for that resspn he was fully prepared to give his support to the
motion, lie could not however agree with the amendment. Ac.
cording to the reasoning of the Hon, and learned Gentleman (Dr.
Lushington) the child would be prevented from visiting his parents
should the Duke continue to live abroad. lie contidererklt would
be better to leave this to the discretion of the Crown, rattier than
that the Parliament should interfere. If a future Parliament
should he of a different opinion they might alter the Act. (Hear.).
By limiting the education of the child to England, it would hare
the effect of depriving him of those advantages which every gentle-
man of a liberal education enjoyed; he would not even be able
to go on a tour; or if appointed ton commission in the army, and
ordered out on foreign service, it would have the effect of prevent..
ing him. lie considered that it was lowering the dignity of Paine.
menu to descend to such minute matters. Much as he appromilli
the principle which empowered the King of this country to interim*
in the education of the younger branches of the Royal family, yet
he considered that such interterence should only take place in case
of necessity. Ile thought the education of the child should in gee'
nerd be left to the discretion of the parent, and that nothing should
be done to destroy or weaken the authority which the parent mot
naturally have over the child. Did any Honourable Member Sp
lieve that any future administration would send the young hints
out of England, unless for a temporary absence only ? He thought
not notch had been said respecting the Royal Duke's residing and
spending his money abroad. lie thought the Duke of Cumin.:
land had a right to spend his property out of England astral'
any other person. It was granted to him by Parliament un
tionally. (Rear, hoar.) He thought the amendment objecti
in point of expedience, and should therefore oppose it, and give
his support to the original Resolution.
WARRE thought the Right Honourable Gen 'wag
had just sat down was pushing the point to a great ustmelee,
he supposed the object of those who supported the besimiwelsk erne
to separate the child from his Royal Parent aitefieSher, by prevent.
ing the young Prince from visiting the Deka, ewe for a temporary
period. This sort of objection was not with% the scope of fair
reasoning. lie should support the amendment because he thought
it absolutely necessary that the House should take every means to
have - child edit -aced in -

.e the —locate, England.
Mr. TILINT said that unless his Majesty's Ministers gave a
pledge that the young Prince should be educated in this country,
he should support the amendment, but on such a pledge being
given, he would vote for the original motion.
Mr. PEEL thought the objectiof the Right Hon. Gentleman,
and of the several other Members who had spoken in favour of the
amendment, might be answered by their agreeing to the motion of
his Right Hon. Friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) and
proposing to sellout in the preamble of the Act by which the grant
should be made, the terms of the amendment now moved. If
this could be done he thought it would be very desirable, as it
would be mote consistent with the respect due to the Throne, that
the answer to the Message from The Crown should he emseistin
terms as nearly an echo to the Message as possible. arias-
sidered the object of most of the Honourable Meadows Cabo
had spoken was, that the grant was made by this Men
an understanding that the chili should be educated hi ,
Land. ‘l'hy rot imply this in the preamble of the
Such a course was peifectly open for any Member to people.
and it would be much more respectful to the Crown deg.*
state it in the Resolution. He really thought the only differ/m*o
opinion that existed was in point of form. Every one wished that
a power should be reserved to the House to provide that the educa-
tion of the child generally should be in England. (Hear.)
Mr. CA LCRAFT said that the resolution was, that the sum
should be granted to the Crown, to be paid to the Duke of Cum-

____...........‘
.1"1111.=
411PI:.V;I:et111 Mt. 11.111141
alimbini;
MOS Whs. that child was heibeUzsig mazgashi
, whielt wee* thing highly te
AN lodic *ems Dr this
wilt a i sprag *-11* iblime
11111101 We : -
booaded so a.m.,
MN 11811461 riddle.
...•
' the
-4-4.....i...er.0•wr aintip*,
Mt asmit _a_ 4.,
after the
tothe.
imam due biIstIeitIMMIONISID dila ''' bssai..tilmit " 16. did
I
give it his — —....gertablif
thet tlhleukeeduac.tiConuesbedandir.
the myoithntgnntpnaspolyat.
sadow_i.
A 51ElisrgEgr-1. whose mane we itesffil MR letrll, ade ke
that the words "to the Dose
support the amendment, because othemeise She House mead ha
tnlownssaecundritypottihniuds
hloda:beelothuledoifityeoivicaltordolf:dthotemvoriri:tedgalin,dalitsumßesoiamuttgeubii
retain the 5,0001. for his own purpose.
to
of
lifemake Cumberland"saquestionot
Sir J. NEWPORT moposed
on
Mr. BIIOGDEN said that if the Right lion. Baronet intended
amendment now before the Committee had been disposed or,
tiered to withdraw.
o.wsnash°roun
While we were excluded, a division on the first amendment took
place.
For the Amendment, 64—Against it, 79.
Sir J. NEWPORT moved, and afterwards withdrew his amend.
men'.
The Committee divided on the original Resolution, when there
appeared--
For the Resolution 164—Against it, s.l—Majority, 50.
JUDGES SALARIES BILL.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER suggested that
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (51r. Brougham) should deter
his objection!' to this Bill until some subsequent stage of the pro.
cecdings, and not in the I tommittee.
Mr. SCA RLETT said he had some objections to the details of
the measure, which must of necessity be discussed in the Corn.
mittee.
Mr. BROUGHAM was willing to postpone his opposition to
any future stage of the Bill, but this could not affect the objections
of hie Hon. and beamed Friend (Mr. Scarlett).
The criANcELLon of the EXCHEQUER coincided with
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite, that the How. Member
for Peterborough's proposition must be debited in the Committee;
he only suggested that the discussions in the Committee should be
confined to this.
The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER then moved the
ilrder of the Day fur the further consideration of the Report of the
Judges Salaries,
The Report was ordered to be re-committed in a Committee of
the whole Hoene.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that an .
instruction be given to the Committee to make provision for the
retired allowances to Judges.—Ordered.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the whole
House.
The Catinstate having put the Resoletion. that 10.000/. be
granted to the Chief Justice in lies of the salaries arising from cer-
tain offices—.
Mr. SCA RLETT rose. He said that in his opinion the propo.
sition contained in the resolution before the Committee ought not
to be acceded to. He disapproved of the abolition of certain sa.
Ivies enjoyed by the Chief Justice, because these sautes were
connected with the office. The Chief Justice bad been in pos-
session of these offices from very ancient times, and they had grown
out of his situation. It vas true that abuses bad been practised.
A system had sprung up of granting those offices to be held after
the death of the Chief Justice, and also of selling the offices.
These practices could not be too much reprobated. But there was'
legitimate source of profit connected with these offices, which arose
from one of two ways. The Chief Justice received the tees of the
office, or he sold the fees. Now it was proposed to take away all
feet from the Chief Justice. He (Mr. Scarlet() did not deny that
Parliament had the power to diminish or abolish those fees ; but
he contended that Parliament, if they diminished or abolished the
fees, ought to make a fair compensation. Now he contended that
the proposition before the House did no such thing. It did not
sand an adequate compensation. What was the Committee
glom odo ? They had agreed to raise the salaries of the Pui.nc
fa=l.4oo/. per annum. Instead of 4,0001. to make their
5,500. The average salary of the Chief Justice, as well as
be could learn, was about 15.0001. Now the present Chief
Justice would be incapable of bartering the rights of his dice
for temporary gain, and was it reasonable that s part of
the emoluments of his office should be taken away, in order
to baud a fund for the increase of the Puisne Judges sale.
Au,. This system was moat unfair, and was derogatory to
the profession. On this principle be (Mr. Searlett) opposed
tbs resolution. He felt that the elevation of the chief per.
souses in the Courts of Common Lew shed a lustre on the whole
prolFweion. The Bar was in some degree like the Lottery. There
were a few great prizes, but there were numberless blanks. The
otal expenses of the profession exceeded infinitely the total profits,
The desire of attaining to the highest situations in the profession
wax an honourable ambition. One mason stated for raising the
Puisne Judges' salaries was, that it would induce eminent lawyers
to accept the situations. Now this argument applied still more
strongly to the Chief Justice, who was the head of the common law
courts. Instead of 10,0001. per annum, he (Mr. S.) should propose,
as a permanent arrangement, that 12,000 f be granted in lieu of
other emoluments. Another subject on which he desired to ob.
serve was, the appointment of the Chief Justice by the Lord Chan-
cellor. This was a most improper practice. An Administration,
as durable as he hoped the present was, would find it desirable to
have as many competitors for the office of Chancellor es possible.
Now, it might be the interest of the Lord Chancellor to hare no
competitors in high stations, and to appoiqt men whom the Minis-
try could not fix upon to fill his office, in case ors vacancy. This,
to be sure, had never happened, but it may so happen, and be at.
tended with great public inconvenience and injury. The import-
ance of the office of Chief Justice could not be overrated. As long
as law exists, and is respected in this country, that situation must
be looked up to with veneration and respect. In conclusion, the
Hon. and Leemsd Gentleman proposed as an amendment to the
Resolution, that 12,0001. be substituted for 10,0001., in lieu of the
salaries now paid to the Chief Justice of the King'a Beech.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
paid great attention to the argumeuts of the Learned Gentleman,
and was compelled to declare his opinion of their fallacy. The
question for the House to consider was, whether or not the sum of
10,0001. per annum was an adequate compensation for the office of
Chief Justice. With regard to the distinguished individual who
at
.present held the ohice, if it were made out that the House was
doing something to deprive him of an adequate compensation, then
there would be reasons for increasing the allowance ; but no such
objection applied to him. The average gross amount of his salary
for many yearspaat was 9,2001. per annum ; but the Chief Justice
had to pay charges in hie profession to the amount of 7 or 000/. per
annum. The net profits therefore were 8,5001. per annum. What
he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) now proposed was, to sdd
to that sum 1.500/., and thus to make the total salary 10,0001.
The ',earned Gentleman (Mr. Scarlett) thought this sum was not
sufficient, and that it ought to be such as to make Persons of the
highest rank and talent accept the office. In this he (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) perfectly 'greed; but he thought there
was a more powerful inducement to accept the office than 2.0001.
a year would be, and that inducement was the greatness and im-
portance of that office. On the whole, he thought a sum of 10,0001.
a year sufficient.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY said a few words, but was not
audible in the gallery.
Sir. MONCK thought the salary of the Chief Justice ought to
be raised in proportion to the salaries of the Puime Judges, and
would therefore vete for the amendment or the Learned Gentleman
(Mr. Scarlett).
Mr. SCA RLETT, in explanation, said that in his opinion tl:e
dignity of the office of Chief Justice could not be made too high.
On this principle be differed from those who objected to raise a
Chief Justice to the Peerage. It should be reatembtred that a
man who made 5.0001. a-year by his private practice, was richer
than a Chief Justice who received 10,0001., because the latter had
to maintain an expense proportionate to his rank. He did not,
therefore, think that 10,0001. a-year was sufficient. lie would,
indeed, rather leave the salary as it was, than consent to such an
elteration.
Air. PEEL said it was clear that the Lord Chief Justice ought
M have some fixed salary from the country, and ought not to depend
tar his profits on the sale of offices. If he thought it • degradation
as the judicial chanter, he would be the last to propose any mea-
Rae of the kind; but the direct contrary was his opinion. lie thought
that that Judge's salary ought to be fixed, and in estimating its
amount it ought to be compared with other high judicial office+.
that of Lord Chancellor of Ireland for instance, which was of the
some amount then proposed to be given. He was quite decided in
the opinion that the dignity of the judicial character should be ills-
tained by liberal remuneration.
After a few words from Mr. S. Woes. see, the amendment fir
granting 12,1.00/. to the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Benet,
was put and negatived, and the original proposition of 10,0001. was
carried.
The other resolutiona respecting the Judges* salaries were that
put anti earned, by which 0,0001. were granted to the Chief Justice
of the Common Pleas, 7,000/. to the Master of the Rolls, and 6,0001.
to the Nice-Chancellor.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in reply to a
quaetion from Mr. Hume, stated that his intention was to regulate.
the fees of the law officers &minding to the recommendanon of
the Commissioners who had been appointed to inquire into that
subject.
Mr. HUME observed that nothing could be more unjust than
to tax litigants in that form, and that the time had arrived when the
abominable fees of the Lord Chancellor ought to be put 3D end to..
so as to deprive him of the inducement to postpone the bushiest of
his Court. He received many fees which he ought not, and it W 3.1
most unjust that he should be at liberty to fix what fees he pleated
Ise himself to receive.
The CH A NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUERhed explained be-
'm why he coold not deal in the manner expected with the Colin Isf
Menem. lie could do nothing with it ur.til the Commissioners
had reported. The notion whitth the lion. Gentleman opposite
sad others entertained of the profits of the Lord Chancellor, were
wave rated to a degree of which the House could have no con-
wuon. The salary which the Lord Chancellor received, exelustie
Obis emoluments as Speaker of the House of Lords, amouthq ably
p_ 8...00u. His fees might be about 7,000/. ; making altogether 1-.066 •
=de was very far short of the sum of 20,0001 and upwards. so ire-.
assay supposed to be received by his Lordship. The whole ct
what he received was much less, and was liable to the land-tax. be•
aides a deduction of 3,5001. for the payment of the Vice-Chsectiffor,
which sum, at the express suggestion of the Lord Chancellor bar.