The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-26 00:00:00

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

Mr. W. EWART gave notice that on April 9th he would
move for a select committee to eonsider the feasibility of
establishing a uniform system of weights and measures.

REGISTER OF VOTERS BILL.

The house then went into committee on this bill.
On clause I being read, which provides for the compil
ing an index to the election lists of the different parishes,
Mr. LOCKE KING moved, as an amendment, that each
index should only be regarded inboroughs comprising more
than six parishes, as in boroughs comprising less than six
parishes, and having only six lists, a voter could have no
difficulty or inconvenience in ascertaining without an index
whether or not his name was on the register. The borough
of Manchester contained only one parish, consequently
there was no use for an index there.

After some further discussion the committee divided,
when there appeared—
For the amendment 43
Against it
Majority against the amendment
The amendment was consequently lost.
The question was then pnt that clause 1 stand part of
the bill, upon which the house again divided, when there
appeared— _ _

For the clause 64
Againit it
Majority for the clause
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill.
The remaining clauses were then agreed to, and the
house resumed.

SMALL HOUSES EXEMPTION (SCOTLAND)

BILL

On the suggestion of Sha.7:inEY,
Sir J. OGILVIE postponed the second reading of this
bill till this day fortnight.

CHANCERY REGIST RATION BILL.
On the order of the day being read for going into com-
mittee on this bill,
Mr. SELWYN opposed the measure on its merits, as the
effect of it would be to take away from the judges of the
Court of Chancery that discretion which they have been
hitherto in the practice of exercising as to the manner in
which justice should be administered in their own courts.
It would give an advantage to the plaintiff in a cause which
the defendant could not take advantage of, while it would
fetter the action of the judges of the Court of Chancery, and
would give rise to much inconvenience as well as expense.
Should the bill be passed, the effect of it would be either to
compel them to increase the number of the judges of
the Court of Chancery, or to return to the old system of
Masters, or to the still more objectionable one of delay.
Mr. HADFIELD approved of the principle of the mea-
sure, but was of opinion that, they ought to establish the
existing rules or regulations, which prohibited barristers-
at-law and attorneys anti solicitors to practice in the Court
of Chancery; and at the proper time he should move an
amendment to that effect.

Mr. ROLT defended the measure, contending that it
would prevent suitors being handed from court to court, as
they were at present. It would take away none of the dis-
cretion decreed by the judges of the Court of Chancery, as
they would still have the discretion of sending questions of
fact to be tried in another court, if they saw it would
be a saving of expenses, but as he considered that
that discretion having been already tried and found
wanting, they should now impose on the judges of
the Court of Chancery the trial of all cases
which came within the particular jurisdiction, either
by jury or otherwise, and he did not think that the trial of
cases by such means would be detrimental to the carrying
on of the other business of the Court.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he had several ob-
jections to the measure as it stood, but as these would be
obviated by an amendment which he had prepared and
would propose at the proper time, he had no objections to
the bill going into committee.

Mr. biALINS considered that the measure would bring
about a great improvement in the practice of the Court of
Chancery, and he should cordially support the motion for
going into committee.

- M. WALPOLE said his opinion of the question was,
that while he agreed to the principle of the measure he
considered that the amendment to be proposed by the Soli-
citor-General would in a great degree neutralise its effect,
and he thought it would be better to leave matters as they
stood, unless they were prepared to take away all discretion
from the Equity Judges, and leave them to try cases in all
the stages and issues which properly came within their
jurisdiction.