The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-16 00:00:00

TION,-FEI3RIIARY 16, 1

the above years, specifying when the first five of such rehearings and
appeals (except such as appear to have been called on and ad-
journed) had been set down at each of such times. Of the
number of cause petitions presented and answered by the Lord Chan-
cellor in each of the said years 1836, 1837, and 1838. Of the num-
ber of petitions answered and set down for hearing at the Rolls."
He had understood fa om the Attorney. General, that this motion
would not be opposed, but neither the Attorney-General nor
Solicitor-General were in their places.

Mr. PEMBERTON said he thought as neither the Attorney,
nor the Solicitor. Genera I were present the motion ought not to be

pressed

Mr. BLE W ITT said the returns he moved for were but conti.
nuations of returns which had already been furnished. The returns
of the bills had been given and he now wanted the answers.
Mr. PEMBERTON observed, that surely the Hon. Member
could not wish to have, as he had inserted in his motion, an
account of the number of folios in each bill and answer. He
would take that opportunity of asking the Noble Lord the Se-
cretary for the Home Department, whether it was the intention
of the Government in the course of the present Session, to lay
before Parliament any measure for the improvement of the ad-
ministration of justice in the Court of Chancery and the Supe-
rior Courts of the country ?—(Hear.) Every successive Session since
he had sat in that House, there been a promise in each Speech from
the Throne of Reform in the Court of Chancery. But only one
attempt had been made to remedy the numerous evils and inconve-
niences which were acknowledged to exist in that Court. That
attempt was the measure introduced by the Lord Chancellor, last
Session, and which fell to the ground. At the present moment the
arrears of causes were greater than they had ever before been,
except on an occasion when the Court, from the illness of the Chan-
cellor, had been closed for sometime. There were no less than 700
causes set down for hearing.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Blewitt, inter.
rupting, said, " 900")—and let it be recollected that to a
cause in Chancery, there might be twenty or thirty parties—
of causes on the general paper, not one had been heard before the
Vice-Chancellor last tern; and only one or two before the Master
of the Rolls.—(Hear, hear.) Of course there were a great number
of motions, short causes, &c. heard in that time. Nor did he (Mr.
Pemberton) mean to cast any reflection on the Judges who pre-
sided in those Courts. As to the Noble and Learned Judge who sat
in the Rolls, where he (Mr. Pemberton) had the honour to prac-
tice, he could truly say that no Judge could possibly apply himself
with more zeal and abilitty to the high and arduous duties of his
office.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Was such a state *f things
to be allowed to pass unreformed ?—(Hear, hear, hear.)
All the " amendments" which had hitherto been attempted had
turned out aggravations of the evil. As a proof of this it might
he stated that since Lord Eldon was Chancellor, when there was no
Vice-Chancellor, when there was no Court of Bankruptcy, and when
therefore the Chancellor had to adjudicate all the Bankruptcy peti-
tions—since that time the arrears had become greater than they ever
were before, though Lord Eldon had been abused for slowness.—
(Cries of " Hear, hear, hear.") If it was the intention of
the Government—as he (Mr. Pemberton) hoped it was —to
introduce a measure on the subject this session—he trusted they
would abolish altogether that miserable abortion of a Court—which
had become quite a bye-word in the profession ; the Court of Re.
view—(Hear)—in which four Judges had been appointed with large
salaries, to do the business which the Lord Chancellor had formerly
accomplished in a month or so, with all the Chancery business in
addition.—(Hear, hear.) The Equity aide of the Court of
Exchequer was also very objectionable, presided over as it was
by Judges who had passed their life in the Courts of Common
Law, and have never acquired any experience in Chancel y ;
it was in fact a kind of bastard Court. The Judicial Corn.
mittee of the Privy Council gave equal dissatisfaction ; the Judges
holding—as they presided there—no official, judicial station, or
legal responsibility. In the House of Lords there was a heavy
arrear of appeals. Amd was it expedient that there should be in
the Chancery department no less than five stages of litigation—
the Master, the Vice-Chancellor, or the Master of the Rolls, the Re-
hearing, the Lord Chancellor, and the House of Lords ?—(Hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he certainly regretted that his
Learned Friends, the law-officers of the Crown, were not present.—
(Hear.) He had no idea of such a discussion as this coming on, or
he would have informed himself more fully upon the subject.
1 t had been frequently matter of deliberation with the Government
what measures should be adopted in respect to the Court of Chan-
cery. It was well known indeed, that the Bill introduced by the
Lord Chancellor last Session had failed ; because those who agreed
as to the evil, differed as to the remedy.—(Hear.) When the pre-
sent Lord Chancellor was appointed, he—(Lord J. Russell)—was
anxious to know what measure on the subject would give satisfaction.
Among others the Hon. and Learned Gentleman readily communi-
cleated to the Government those measures of reform which lie
considered necessary. After a full consideration of the
various opinions and suggestions of the Learned persons
belonging to the profession, the Lord Chancellor proposed
the Bill founded u;son them, but it was found that with respect to
that Bill the widest difference of opinion prevailed. It was what
the Hon. Member for Kilkenny would call a half measure ; but it
would certainly have greatly reduced the number of appeals, as it
provided that a party might appeal either to the Lord Chancellor or
to the House of Lords, but that it he did appeal to the Lord Chan.
cellor, he then lost his right of appeal to the superior tribunal. It
also provided for the dispatch of business in the Court of Chancery.
The Noble and Learned Lord to whom reference had been made
(Lord Langdale) had said that there should be no such person as
a political Judge sitting in the Cabinet, but on the contrary,
that there should he a person placed at the head of the
Court of Chancery, and that there should be another sitting in the
Cabinet to advise the Government with respect to legislative mea.
sures respecting the law. That it would have been a total innova.
tion in the constitution of the Court of Chancery. On the other
hand, Lord Lyndhurst, another high authority, was of a totally dif-
ferent opinion, and was for increasing the strength of the
Court of Chancery by appointing extra Judges. When
therefore there was such a difference of opinion among
those who were most competent to advise, it became totally
hopeless to introduce a measure upon the subject, It was evident
to the Lord Chancellor and his colleagues that improvements
might be easily framed, but it was also evident they would not be so
easily carried. It was always the wish and intention of the Go.
vernment to bring in remedial measures, and they would be ready
to do so on the first opening that offered itself and showed a
prospect of carrying it. He was happy to find that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had not found it necessary to join in his censure
of the courts any censure upon the Hon. and Learned personages who
presided there.—(Hear, hear, from Mr. Pemberton.) If any one
were to say that the present Lord Chancellor was not eminently
qualified for the high station he filled, such an opinion would be
immediately contradicted by the unanimous opinion of the bar.
The arrcar of business then did not proceed from any failure on
the past of the persons presiding in those courts.—(Cheers)—the
present Lord Chancellor had reduced the arrear of business since
his appointment.—(Cheers.) Since the time that Lord Eldon
had the whole weight of the business on his own shoulders the
business of the Court of Chancery had greatly increased. He
thought the Information required might be given in a greatly con-
densed form, no that much expense might be saved, unless It was
absolutely necessary that the motion should be pressed. That night it
might perhaps be better to postpone It, but he had no objection to
the production of all the papers.
Mr. PEMBERTON—The Noble Lerd had not answered the ma-
terial question which he had put to him.
Lord J. RUSSELL—Tie Government would bring forward a
measure on the subject whenever they saw a fair prospect of car-
rying it.
Mr. BLEWITT could state, that in the three years before the
appointment of the Vice-Chancellor the causes set down amounted
to only 540, white in the years 1833, 1834, and 1!435 they amounted
to 1,300.
Mr. PEMBERTON—The number of causes set down affords no
criterion of the business of this Court.
Lord J. RUSSELL—Then perhaps the 700 arrear causes,
stated by the Hon. Member, affords no criterion of the actual arrear
before the Court.—(A laugh.)
The returns were the ordered.
_ .

THE ROYAL EXCHANGE.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved to refer
papers NO- ich were laid on the table of the House, on the 6th of
February, relating to the building of the Royal Exchange to the
Select Committee of the improvements in the metropolis.
Mr. PR AEU considered that it was useless to refer to the papers.
He thought the House ought to know for what purpose tl.e papers
were laid before the House.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that it
the Honourable Member meant to discuss the subject, it would be
better that he should wait till the papers were in the hands of Mem.
bers before he did so.
Mr. PRAM) said that it was his intention to object to the
papers being referred, and he would either do so now, or at
another period.
Mr. HA WES considered if the question was to be discussed
the House ought to have full official information, and not act upon
statements put forth by interested parties. He wished to know
whether Honourable Members intended to' oppose the printing of
the papers ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that they were
already ordered to be printed.
Mr. LAW thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought
to state tie use intended to be made of the papers, when referred."
Mr. BARING thought the best course would be to reler the papers
to the Select Committee.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would not go into
the discussion now. If it was intended to discuss the subject, the
better course would be to adjourn it till Monday.
After a few observations from Mr. PATTISON, the subject was

postponed till Monday.
Mr. HINDLEY moved, That the Journals of the House re.
lating to the cases after mentioned, in which counsel was ordered
to be heard, and evidence was taken, at the Bar, or in Committees

of the whole House, in support of Petit ions complaining of ex.
(sting Laws, be read by the Clerk, and be entered in the Votes,
. . .

•iz. - The Journals relating to that part of the Act for uniting the
Kingdoms of England and Scotland, which regulated the election

of ilembers for Scotland, the 25 t h day of November, and the
Ist and 3rd days of December, 1708. The Journals relating to
the Duties on the importation of Copper and Brass, the Bth, 13th,
15th, 16th, and 20th days of Jan. and the 2d day of February, 1721.

The Journals relating to the Duties on Cotton Stuffs, bleached or
dyed, the 16th, 18th, and 21st days of March, and sth, 6th, 6th,
12th, 13th, 20th, and 21st days of April, 1785. The Journals re.

►39.

lating to the Shop Tax, the 6th, 15th, 22d, and 23d days of
February, and the 28, 6th, and 7th days of March, 1786. The
Journals relating to the Slave Trade, the 9th day of May, 17811;
the 23d day of March, the 21st, 26th, and 27th days of May,
and the 9th, 12th, 15th, 16th, 18th, 19th, 22d, and 238 days of
June, 1789; the 25th and 27th days of January, the 13th and
23d days of April, and the 9th day of June, 1790. The Journals
relating to the Duties on Licenses to deal in Spirituous Liquors,
the sth and 31st days of March, the 22d day of April, and the 7th
day of May, 1790. The Journals relating to certain Orders in
Council, the 10th, 11th, 14th, 18th, 22d, 23d, and 24th days of
March; the Ist, 4th, and 13th days of April; the 4th and 26th
daps of May; and the 9th day of June 180$. His object in mak-
ing the motion was that Members should know what the practice of
the House was upon the subject.
The SPEAKER said that he wished to make a suggestion to
the Honourable Member, but not with the intention of throwing
any objection in his way, if the House took a proceeding it was
desirable not to depart from, the usages of Parliament. The Hon.
Member proposed to send forth, under the sanction of the House,
this list of precedents which he had determined on. There was
not the least doubt that every one of those precedents were to be
found in the Journals, but it did not follow that there might not be
other precedents. The usual course was, that when proceedings
were taken, a Committee was appointed for the purpose of ascer-
taining the facts with accuracy, and then the proceedings came for.
ward in a better shape.
Mr. HINDLEY said that he would bow to the authority of the
Speaker, but he found that in 1814 certain extracts of tho Journals
had been produced.
The SPEAKER—No doubt, the Hon. Member was correct in
his statements, but he appeared to have misunderstood what he (the
Speaker) had said. He had stated that he considered it would not
be proper to send forth this extract under the sanction and authority
of the House, without having ascertained that all the precedents
had been referred to. It was usual to refer it to a Committee, in
order to ascertain that all the precedents had been referred to.
Mr. HINDLEY then gave notice that he should bring the sub.
ject forward on Monday.
Mr. HUME moved for the return of the revenues received in
Lower Canada in each of the years 1833, 1834, 1635, 1836,
1837, and 1838. He said that he was not aware at the time
he had given the notice that the Under-Secretary for the Colenies
would be absent from the House, because he intended to arraign
the conduct of that officer, which had not been correct. He wished
to know whether there would be any objection to the production of
the papers he had moved for.
31r. F. BARING (who turned his back to the gallery, and was
nearly inaudible, was understood not to object to the production of
the Return of the Revenues, but to object to the granting the other
information sought by the Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. HUME said that in January 1838 he had stated in that
House that the inhabitants of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,
Prince Edward's Island, and Newfoundland, were as dissatisfied
with the condition of their Governments as the inhabitants
of the Canadas. This statement had been immediately
contradicted from the Treasury Bench, and hem had
next
assertion, day
amovednd th e
yfohr
atdh
not r3eettuhrne
been
n tloa
tdprhoevfoer
ehtt eh e tHruotulis
e.o f
The
s