The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-28 00:00:00

sons, perhaps, in extremis, were to dispose of their
property—when, in fact, they were not in a condition
to refer to legal Acts of Parliament, or had ready
access to legal assistance. Now, the first objection -to
I the Bill was on the ground of its complexity, and the
next, that which had reference to the signature. The
-Hon. and Learned Gentleman might, have used a mach
simpler and more practical form. The bekt objection
related to a series of paragraphs whiCh he was asto-
nished should have found their way into the'Bili- The
Hon. and Learned Solicitor-General justified the inser-
tion of the string of words in question, by saying, if in-
serted, we should not haie the diffienities again to over-
come which had already given so much"trouble. Bat all
those difficulties'arose from-these words—" at the end or
foot." Why, then, was it necessary to have these words
at all? , If the diaiult- circumstances enumerated
were not to restrict the Aet, why put in- the words at
all? His opinion was that you could not, make an Act
of Parliament too simple, or put it into words too fami-
liar, so as to be comprehended by all persons who were
not legal persons. Then the next objection was rela-
tive to worth inserted underneath the signature. He
hoped the Bill would be referred to a Select Committee,
that it might be put into a proper shape for the House
to pass.
Mr. ViTHITESIDE thought thii an extraordinary
argument, considering that the Bill had come down from
the House of Lords—(Hear, hear)—and after careful
consideration on the pareoethe most able of the Noble
and Learned Lords among their Lordships. The Bill went
first directly .and affirmatively to the evil complained of
as to the position of the signature in the will, and .then
went negatively to declare that none of the bad deci-
sious which had been come to on that point should inva-
lidate any will.--(flear; bear.) Nothing could more
properly carry out the object of the raeasure.-!—(flear.)
Mr. J. 'STUART said the clause called " a farrago of
words" was framed by the-most eminent and-experienced
equity lawyers of the age--(flear)—and agreed to by all
the lawyers in the House of Lords.—(Hear.) To 'hear
this called a " farrago Of, words" was really extraordi-
nary, end did not tend to the credit of the debates in the
House of CommOns.—(Hear.) The effect of the latter
part of the clause was only to negative a series of bad,
decisions, founded on an entire misapprehension of the
object of the Legislature in framing the Act of Victoria.
The measure was supported by such men as Lord.
St. Leonard's, Lord Lyndherat, Lord' Cranworth, and:
Lord. Campbell--(Hear, hear)—and two of them, who
criticised the Bill, wereagreed ss to' the nature of the.
'amendments.—(Hear, hear.) 'The Bill was to be re-
ferred to a Select Committee; but if the legal.lgebeis
could not agree in the House, why should they in the.
Committee?—(Hear.) After all this, they would base
to adopt some authority, and what could.they more.pro-
perlY defer to than the highest in the realm?—
(Hear, hear.) It must be recollected, that if the Bill
were materially altered; it could not • possibly pass
this session, which all agreed was necessary and desi-
rable in order to destroy the bad decisions that had
been referred to. Nothing could be intended by'a re-
ference to a Select Committee but its total defeat and
destruction, and leaving the :law in dis-
'graceful
s,tate.—(Hear,,hear.) its'eplesent
Mr. MULLINGS said the
,proposition was to omit
the words " signed at .tbe foot of the will," the object
of which was to prevent any fraud from being perpe-
trated by the adding of anything after the signature. If
the amendment were adopted, fraudulent practices would
not be guarded against, and the law would be left_ open
to all the difficulties that at present eXisted. -
The MASTER of the ROLLS said his object in
moving that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee
was not to delay its passing,'but to obtain the assistance
of the judges, in order that the Bill might be put in a
proper form. He .begged, therefore,. to move that the-
chairman report progress, with, the view of the,Bill being
referred to a Select Committee.

Mr. WALPOLE said that to send the Bill to a Select
Committee . would be to-send it to a Committee of
lawyers, who would all differ in opinion on the subject.
He had not beard a single argument to show that the
Bill would not meet the defects in the law of 1837. The
Bill would not alter that law, but would simply provide
that the judges were Aot, IQ put, that foraed.constructien
on the Act which bad had the effect of leaving a vast
number of wills unadministered. He did hope the Com-
mittee would not think it necessary to delay this benevo-
lent measure.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For reporting progress ... ' 64
Against it ... ' ••• •• 121 •
Majority • • ••• —57
_ _

In clause 2, " -
Mr. BETHELL moved the insertion of words to make
the clause applicable only to the wills of persons who
should die after the passing of the Act.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was in favour of the
clause as it stood. .
Sir P. WOOD said the notion of sending a Bill to a
Select Committee upon coming down from the House
of Lords was the most absurd proposition that could be
made to that House. Everybody must see that immense
litigation must arise from the clauses now framed, and
he protested against such's system' of legislation. .
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND de-
fended the clause, and complained of, the objections
that were now started after the Bill had been so long be-
fore the House, without any amendment being placed
upon the paper.
The clause with the remaining clauses were then agreed
to, and the House resumed.
GENERAL BOARD OF HEALTH BILL.

On the order of the day for going into Committee on
this Bill,
Mr. BROTHERTON moved an instruction that the
Committee have power to amend the Public Health Act
(1848).—Agreed to.
The House then went into Committee, Mr. BERNAL
in the chair.

The several clauses were agreed to, some new clauses
were added, and the House resumed.
INDUSTRIAL AND GENERAL PARTNERSHIPS
BIL G.
•On the motion of Mr,. SL[ NEY this Bill went
through a Committee, the various clauses being agreed
to without amendment. •
The Public -Works Bill was read a third time and
passed, •
The Poor Law Board Continuance (Ireland) Bill was
read a second time and ordered to be Committed.
Mr. BOUVERIE moved that the House do go into
Committee on the Burgh Harbours (Scotland) Bill, and
observed that its provisions were to enable smell burghs
to make rates to repair these harbours.
Mr. F. M'KENZIE opposed the Bill, on the ground
that it gave too large a power to these small munici-
palities to tax all vessels entering
Right Hon. Gentleman the ,presid
Trade would explain what the. objections of the Go-
vernment were. these harbours.
ent of the Board of
Mr. HENLEY was not satisfied that a proper check
was placed upon tho taring powers of these munici-
palities.
Mr. PORTAL, at that late hour, suggested that the
Committee should be postponer',
ue sedivieled, when ere appeared
Committee. there
64
ToeForlirjh t

against the Lo .
Against it ...
Majority 10,6
,-42
On the motion for considering the amendment on the
Ecclesiastical Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Bill.
Mr. ANSTEY objected to proceeding with it at that
late time of the night, and moved As an amendment that
the House do now. adjourn.

The motion was sccordingty. postponed. ' •
On tha motion for the second
Bishops Bill, reading of the Colonial
Mr. ANSTEY also objected ,
Bill, as it was, au attempt to to pyoneecji-pg with that
Rouse had no pretence or right
titles to.which that
The second reading way, aftert. , • •
poned till this day, ._
Some discussion, post-
MAYNOopu
The dropped orders were then
the adjourned debate on mi.,; proceeded with; and on
Mr. FRESHFIELD moved eeth being read, ,
sumed that day, at. twelve o'
clock..
the 'debate be re-
Mr. WALPOLE protested against
at twelve o'clock, after it had tiViust the. Hotistieitting,
two o'clock. It would be inspossTil been sitting till near
the country to be carried on if Membersle for the business of
come down again in a few' hours were obliged to
Mr. ANSTEY said the motiofi° ter House.
to provoke the appeal of the Righthad been made merely
was a repetition of the fareeor Hon. Gentleman.
It
Hon. Members wanted the debate W, ednesday last. If
to have been there at eightVelook!e go on they ought
Not one of the Miniaters" were -pr,,fla Tuesday evening.
was counted out, although the. Af:e.het when the House
tions before the House intimated Or" who had mo-
way. If the Government would noti- intention to give
a measure which they believed to be oj a day to discuss
let the Hon. Member for War wioksb.l'ital importance,
charge of the order, and put an end to move the dis-
Mr. FRESI-IFIELD hoped it would
that dull farce.
that his side of the 'House was not anx; not be supposed
discussion brought on at the earliest possible period.
the Hon. Member for Warwickshire b.‘,o!. proceeding of
with their entire approbation.—(A itin"uorroughout met
to know what was the condition of the Government ) He wanted
that question. There sat the Hon. mem upon
shire, who bad jumped through - thro r for Feeble-
question. When the House re-assembled goo‘ras on the
where were the Members of the GoveriT eight o'clock
were all ready to declare their hostility to :teut? ' They
grant, and yet they shirked the debate it, 0 e Xfayriopth,
the Derby. Why, the National Club.oohi,rder to go to
three Members at eight o'clock, and a
the anlY 'fluster
only one Member; when the debate was about
overnment
"b nOollt to be re-
sumed. Mr. NEWDEGATE was certainly under the i
sion on Tuesday evening that the late whi -mpre-
s Ministry, seeing that there were three
of the
motions on the paper, would have endeavoureir Whig
and keep a House; but the Home might 0,„,, to make
prise when he found" that that Right Hon, Gentleman
sur-
had 'actually counted out the House. Ho could assure
.the Hon. and Learned Member for Athlone, that
was the greatest anxiety te bring on the question, at there
and his friends were, however, unable to delude
He
country as to their real intentions. H
--e appealed e the
Government, us all parties seemed willing to bete the
the question, whether some. day might hot b bring on
e hzid for
its discus= ln? .
The O'GORMAN MAHON said he could
assure
Hon. embers that the Runlet Catholic Meenbers
M
most anxious to have the qur,stion fully discusso,
more
were
especially as imputations had been attempted to
be
upon the religion to which he bed the honour to b least
If documents such as the Hon. Member had referredeeg.
were iii, existence. he averred that they were repudiatedto
by fl'-)th the laity nd the ecclesiastics of the
Catholic - , I, Roman
religion. ahoy courted discussion, and they
ealied upon the Government to demand
o respond to the
of the lion: Member tor-North 'Warwickshire.
Sir J. PAKINGTON
into the di 'hoped they
• • 'n 4n Lucia
would not be led
Minion oft question I -0114110.9nyer-