The Sun.
London, England, 1830-06-19 00:00:00

y, -,

'~ ~

)
sl/4 :ss
in and passed over to the next Session. lie- also
wanted to know what were the sentiments of the
GOvernment with respect. to the Local Judica-
ture Bill just' introduced by the Learned Member
for Knaresborough; because it would be singular
enough if, while this Act was diminishing local judi-
cature, Government should admit the principle of
that Bill, which was to establish local jurisdiction—
thus in 1830 performing the act of demolition, and
in 1831 the act of reconstruction. The House was
also entirely kept in the dark as to what system of
practice was to be pursued; they knew, indeed,
that the Judges were to be changed, but no hint
had been dropped as to what other proceedings were
to mark the alteration. He would even concede that
the new Judges were required; but surely the
Welsh mode of pleading ought to be retained.
The forms of proceeding in the Courts of Wales
might still be preserved, notwithstanding the ap-
pointment of additional Judges; but the Attorney-
General said no. It certainly might not be con-
venient to Hon. and Learned Gentlemen to hold six,
or ten, Courts in one day; but the practice was ex-
ceedingly convenient to the people of Wales. Under
the new arrangement to be made by the present Bill,
all the law of Wales was to emanate from Westminster
Hall. The whole was to come from London, in-
stead of being had almost the moment it was re-
quired in the Principality. Thus cheap justice was
exchanged for dear. He would gladly learn from
the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen opposite how the
Bill was to operate. Not one of them had as yet
condescended to explain how the Bill would operate
--not, ire was sure, from any inability on the part
of the Learned Attorney-General to explain his
meaning whenever he might be so minded ; but it
must be evident to the House that he had not yet
thought proper to explain the operation of the Bill
or that of any one of its clauses. He had not up
to the present moment distinctly stated whether the
rules, the forms, the Courts, the pleadings, were to
be all or in part preserved or abolished. If there
were any man in that House who knew anything of
the matter, he had not yet thought proper to explain
himself, or enlighten those who happened to be in
ignorance, in which number he included die greater
part of those who heard him. If there were any
one in that House who understood the operation of
the Bill, it was greatly to be regretted that he should
keep the knowledge to himself, and call upon Par-
liament to legislate in the dark—to legislate specula-
tively—to legislate injuriously. They could only
understand this, respecting the matter in question,
that they were getting rid of that which was in ex-
istence, but they received no information as to what
they were to obtain in return. As for the pre-
amble of the Bill, it might well be likened to a sheet
of white paper, for it contained no information what-
soever; and upon those grounds he thought he
should best consult the interests of justice in re-
fusing his support to the measure.
Colonel WOOD had conversed with every per-
son of influence arid intelligence resident in the
county which he represented, and, with very few
exception, he found every one of them, professional
and otherwise, disposed to support any measure
which would go to assimilate the administration of
justice in England and Wales.
Mr. O'CONNELL objected to the principle of
the Bill. Had any effort been made by the framers
of the present Bill to reconcile varying and conflict-
ing decisions, to remedy the evil of positive Statutes
being repealed by Judges, or any one of the crying
and intolerant abuses that had crept into our system
of jurisprudence ? How then could that Bill be
called a Bill for the Reformation of the LaW ? It
was a "leaving out of the part of Hamlet' by par-
ticular desire." It applied itself to that which was
of secondary or of no importance, and passed by in
silence the only matters demanding remedy. What
did it do for expedition ? Nothing at all ; though
there was the Court of King's Bench with more
business than it could get through, the Court ofl
Common Pleas with much less than it could per- I
form, and the Court of Exchequer with scarcely any.
As it was true that the Court of King's Bench had
too much business, it might, perhaps, be some ad-
vantage_ to it to add another Judge ; but there was
the Court of Common Pleas with not more than a
third of the business of the Court of King's Bench.
The Court of Common Pleas tried but 3,000 causes
in a year; while the King's Bench tried 11,000.
Why not remedy the monopoly enjoyed by a certain
class of barristers in the Court of Common Pleas?
—(A laugh.) Other causes were supposed to keep
the want of business at so low an ebb in that
Court; but there was a third Court, and one
in which no business was done—he meant the
Court of Exchequer—why was not something
done with that ? It might be made as efficient
as the Court of King's Bench for anything that
he saw to the contrary. It might be made to try
10,000 causes in a year, anti the Common Pleas
8,000 above its present number, being a total of
18,000. Would there not be in that something that
might tend to render justice cheap and expeditious?
In Ireland the Court of Exchequer at present did
the most bus;ness. Into the causes which created
that difference he would not atop to inquire, but in
Ireland the case was not always so. At one time
the Common Pleas bad the greaten amount of
business; it was when fees were payable; and then,
he might say, that in 75 out of every 76 cases the
plaintiff succeeded. So attractive did this circum-
stance render the Court, that suitors flocked to it in
unprecedented numbers; no sooner, however was
the system changed and fees abolished, than the
current of business began to flow in an opposite
channel, and the Court of Common Pleas in Ireland
became sufficiently deserted. To return to the Bill
under consideration. It abolished the local juris-
diction of the Courts of Wales, under which execu-
tion could be had in the short space of fifteen or
twenty days, and, probably, under the new arrange-
ment the suitor would not have execution in as
many months. Hence it was evident that expe-
dition was not gained by it, and he believed it would
be found that it was equally evident that cheapness
was not amongst the number of its recommendations.
In Wales if a poor man had a legacy bequeathed to
him of 201., which to him was wealth, he had his
local Court of Equity for the recovery of that
legacy; that he possessed in all times past; but what
was he to have fur the future ? The Bill before
the House took away from him Iris local Court of
Equity, and gave him nothing in return except the
benefit of filing his Bill in the High Court of Chan-
cery, and the dignity of an appeal to the House of
Lords. Again, in the case of verbal or written
agreements for land of a particular kind, though it
might be for five acres, it was still an object to a
poor man ; and yet from the resident in Wales the
present Bill took away the remedy which he enjoyed.
In Ireland he had himself 500, nay 5,000 times told
the poor man who held agreements for land, " You
have the clearest case in the world—there can be no
doubt that justice and the princisies of equity are
with you, but you must file a Biir in the Court of
Chancery." Such a reply of course put an end to
his hopes; and he had no difficulty in asserting that
the want of a remedy in such cases led to much of
the disturbances which unhappily oceurred in Ireland.
One of the most awful crimes committed in that
country—the burning of the family of the Sheas—
had its origin in the want of such a remedy as that
which he described—the want of means to obtain a
decree for specific execution. That \Vales possessed;
and now the Hon. and Learned Gentleman sought
to deprive the Principality of that advantage. Was
he, in making those observations, to be understood as
standing up in that House to advocate the existing
system as it stood now in Wales 2 Quite the con-
trary; he was any thing but the advocate of a system
which enabled gentlemen to exercise the functions of
Judges in any part of the kingdom, and at the same
time possess seats in that House; h s was anything
but the advocate of a system which allowed gentle-
,nen to give opinions upon nominal cases in their
capacity of practising barristers, and next decide si-
milar cases in the capacity of Judges. If neces-
sary, let the number of those Judges be cur-
tailed—let the salaries of those who remained be
increased—let them devote their entire time to the
discharge of their judicial duties—let all practicable