The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-12 00:00:00

S U N,

der.htful if it could be nominated? and at that late
priod of the session it was desirable that no time should
be lost.
m CEIANCELLO.R of the EXCHEQUER, would
bo extromely•glad if he could f4ellitate the inquiry that
had been ordered by the House; and if he could learn
from the Hon. Gentleman then, or in the course of the
evening, that there was any prospect of proposing a
Committee, the nomination of which would not lead to
a protracted discussion, he would certainly do what he
could to suit his wishes. At present he could not take
upon himself the responsibility of allowin€, a question,
which would apparently lead to a long discussion, to
it:dollen) with the progress of public business. Both
the morning and evening sittings were at the present
mot-nent apportioned to very important business; and,
althongn he was ready to accede to the suggestion of
the lion. Gentleman, provided he was assured that
there would be no delay, still until there was some as-
surance or certainty of such a result, he could not take
the responsibility of permitting the nomination of a
C4.)mmittee whicd would unduly retard the public buiiness.
IMPROVEfiIENT OF TIE JURISDICTION OF
EQUITY BILL.

The House then went. into Committee on this Bill, Mr.
BERNAL in the chair.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY moved, pursuant to novice,
to omit clauses 1 to 9 inclusive, conlendiug that it was
not expedient to print the preliminary dccuments in a
Chancery suit, and that besides the reduction of expuso
that would be thereby attained, it would have the effect
of stopping many Chancery suits in limine. He would
move, in the first inst.ance, that clause 1 be omitted.

Tile ATTORNEY-GENERAL contended that as the
Bill at present stood the expeuso would be lessened and
the proceedings simplified.
Mr. BETHELL also supported the clause. Under the
former system the preliminary documents were the source
of very great expense, and in many instances before the
defendant knew the offence of which he was charged, ho
was put to some hundreds of pounds of expense.
The filing of bills was in that way the source of
a groat deal of oppression. The benefit that would
result from the change proposed by the present
measure was, that the defendant would be informed
at once, and at the commencement of the suit, of the
complaint against hips in a manner that would be intelli-
gible to the meanest capacity, and might be able to avoid
the expense of litigation without resorting to professional
aid. By the printing of the preliminary documents much
expense would be saved, instead of any additional costs
being incurred; and, indeed, it would be most desirable
if the plan of the printing the documents was extended
to other stages of the suit.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said he had not been con-
vinced by the arguments of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman. It was impossible to say that printing was re-
quisite, or would be inexpensive. The object of reduc-
ing the length of bills in Chancery might be otherwise
obtained. He should negative the clauses.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 2 was agreed to, with a verbal amendment in-
serted on the motion of the MASTER of the ROLLS.
On clause 3,
The gASTER of the ROLLS likewise introduced a
verb of amendment, and the clause was agreed to.
Clause 4 was agreed to without alteration.

On clause 5,
The MASTER of the ROLLS moved a verbal
amendment, which was assented to, and the clause
then pissed, as also did clauses 6,7, and 8, without
obf.erva
On clause 9, giving the Chancellor power to alter,
modify, or suspend any of the previous provisions of the
measure,
Mr. KEOGH objected that it might neutralise the
measure altogether.
Mr. WALPOLE said as it was an experiment it was
deemed necessary to give the Chancellor power of mcdi-
fyicg it.
The clause was agreed to; as were clauses 10 and 11.
On clause 12, requiring that in tho absence of a
near relative or testamentary guardian, the consent of
the Court be required to the filing of a bill on behalf
of an infant,

The MASTER of the ROLLS moved its omission,
stating that, it was often necessary to file a bill at a few
hours' notice.
Mr. WALPOLE admitted that delay might arise in
some instances, but yet thought the provision would be
useful. Some power was required to prevent an impro-
per person from being put, in as next friend.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL suggested that it
might be sufficient to require the consent of the Court
within some short time after the filing of the bill.
the MASTER of the ROLLS conceived that this
might in some measure meet the difficulty.
Mr. BE THELL thought the clause would be at once
nugatory and obstructive. It would entail the necessity
for that most objectionable and onerous proceeding, an
ex parte application, which was altogether alien from the
proper proviece of a judicial tribunal.
Mr. WALPOLE concurred to a great degree in those
observations, ana promised to consider them before the
report.
The MASTER of the ROLLS suggested the post-
ponement of the clause.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected.
Sir J. GRAHAM said this subject had been fully
cousidered by the Commission, and there appeared to be
between the retention and rejection of the clause a
choice of difficulties. His own opinion, however, was
in conformity with that of the Commissioners, that it
ought to he omitted. _
Me. HENLEY observed that the judges in the Court
of Chancery were of a different, opinion, with the excep-
tion of the Master of the Rolls.
Sir P. WOOD said, as the father was usually dead, all
the children infants, and the mother executrix and an
accounting party in the suit, the application to the Court
would be necessary iu almost every case for the selection
of a next friend" to institute the suit.
Mr. WALPOLE ultimately, in deference to tho
opinion of the Commissioners, withdrew the clause.
Clauses 13, 1405, 16, were afterwards agreed to.
Oa clause 17,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY moved to insert—" From the
time when this Act shell commence and take effect, all
special clauses 'Shall be sot down for hearing in the
cause-bocks kept at the registrar's office, and shall be
inserted in the daily papers of the several courts." His
object was to prevent uncertainty as to the time when
motions came on.
Mr. WALPOLE said the amendment had nothing
practicable in it. The greater number of motions were
so sudden, that the papers were not delivered until the
night before the hearth;.—(,fear.)
The MASTER of the ROLLS said the amendment.
would be most mischievous; it would
.prevent the judge
elnBd
tom e2n t 5
of
foimts toarkdienrg. a motion of the most pressing character out
Mr. CARTER said under this system a junior counsel
had no chance of bringing on a motion.
The
Clausesamwagarheoeudttao.division.
winaeslunseivg:twiveerde

Oa clause 26, -
The ;}TASTER of the ROLLS said that this and the
28th clause threw a very great deal of additional duty on
the examiners of the Court of Chanory, though the Bill
certainly
was au improvement in the practice of the
court, while at the same time there was no provision
made for a fair remuneration for the extra services im-
posed upon these officers.
Mr. WALPOLE said, however jest the complaint of
his Hon. and Learned Friend might be, nothing could
be done in the matter at present. It certainly did seem
not to be quite fair to increase the work w►thout in-
creasing the salaries. At the present time the chief clerk
had 2001. a year more than the examiners, which was an
anomaly.

The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 27 to 29 were also agreed to after a short con-
versation on the latter respecties, the conduct of Com-
enissicaers for taking evidence in the country, in which
hope was expressed by Sir J. GRAHAM that local and
county courts would be made available for that purpose.
In clause 30, which related to the mode iu which the
evidence of witnesses should be taken before the exa-
miners,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in answer to a re-
mark of Mr. C. Villiers, said that the clause provided
that the examiner should take a narrative of the evidence,
and that the witness should sign ir.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, to meet certain objec-
tions, proposed to insert words which would prevent the
preceedings being rendered invalid in case the witness
refused to sign the narrative.
The MASTER of the ROLLS said the narrative
would be of no value unless signed by the witness,
and unleSs Le signed it he could not be indicted for
perjury.
The amendment of the Solicitor-General was with-
drawn, and the consideration of it postponed till the
report.
Mr. C. VILLIERS said that before the clause was
agreed to he wisaed to point out that the proposed
mode of taking the evidence would open a door for
great delay and expense, and would lead to the same
results as the present system of taking evidence by the
Masters.
The clause was then agreed to, as also were clauses
down to 58.
Oa clause 59,
The MASTER of the ROLLS said it appeared to
him that this clause did not come within the scope of
the Bill. It appeared to him that each court should be
able to execute justice by means of the functions and
powers possessed by itself, and without resorting to any
other court.—(Hear.) Now, the present clause, so far
from conferring that power, only extended the existing
evil of appeals from equity to law courts, and he was
therefore opposed to it. He hoped it would not be per-
severed with.—(aear.)
clause
sneot
w comeas
The SOLICITOR,. GENERAL admitted that the
the Bill, and
therefore,tht itsoewni th
struckionm itshs eioo
ue. scope
of
be, whenaicgh errewedte inserted
The MASTER of the ROLLS brought
the Bill:
gdhtth the rpetmhaeintiwn go
bt each
be
cfolalluoswesinhgacvliganuses
" That no suit in the said court° sr
open to ob-
jection on the ground that a merely declaratory
or order is sought thereby, and it shall be decree
lawful for the
court to make binding declarations of right without
granting consequential relief."
.. That it shall not he lawful for the said Court
Chancery, in any cause or matter depending in the same
of
court, to direct a ease to be stated for the opinion of any
i court of cornmon law; but the said Court of Chancel
shall have full power to determine any questions of
law which, in the judgment of the said Court of Chan-
cery, shall he necessary to be decided previously to the
\
deciEdon of the equitable question at issue between the
parties. .
The Bill was then reported, with amendments, to the
\gouze.
M ASTERS IN C.FIANCERY ABOLITION BILL.
- •14, fko, w(=t; ,I.r.', Camraittea upon this Bill.
Oa ciaase 1, WIIiCII pruviti.s for the abolition of the
T masterhes, •
' MASTO of the ROLLS moved the insertion