The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-16 00:00:00

THE PUBLICATION OF

‘, THE

SUN"

COMMENCES EVERY AFTERNOON

AT THREE O'CLOCK,

AND THE

LATE OR THIRD EDITION,

CONTAINING THE
DEBATES IN PARLIAMENT THE SAME EVENING,
With all other News arriving up to the hour of Post,
AT SEVEN O'CLOCK.

EXPRESS EDITIONS
will be forwarded after the Post is closed by the

Latest Trains.

tr 44) 4"4:000.42: ‘LASIPIB74,4 MAL

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 1853,

An interesting discussion took place in the
House of Lords on Monday evening, respecting
one of the most important, as it is confessedly one
of the most arduous, of the duties connected with
the measures of Legal Reform now under con-
sideration. It arose on a question asked of the
Lord Chancellor by the veteran Lord LYNDHURST
respecting the contemplated consolidation of the
Statutes. The Noble and Learned Lord alluded
to a subject which had long been painfully noto-
rious, and which had but too frequently elicited
such grave censures from the most eminent mem-
bers of the Bench and the Bar, and something still
Stronger from unfortunate litigants, who had been
subjected to heavy and almost ruinous costs through
the obscurities and contradictions contained in
enactments sanctioned by the collective wisdom.
The evils arising from this crude and hasty legis-
lation have, indeed, attained such a height as to
render it essential that something should be clone,
and that without a moment's unnecessary delay.
There may yet be found ridiculous absurdities
reflecting disgrace and odium on those by whom
such follies were perpetrated or sanctioned. The
case alluded to by Lord LYNDHURST, of the statute
which provided that one moiety of the penalty
incurred for a certain offence (viz., 14 years' tran-
sportation), should go to the informer, and the
other moiety to the parish, is by no means
a solitary instance of such oversights and
anomalies. Many similar absurdities were
pointed out by Lord BROUGHAM, in his
admirable speech in the House of Peers in 1848,
and subsequently in his letter to Sir JAMES
GRAHAM, he cited many other acts that ex-
hibited gross negligence on the part of those by
whom they had been carried through both branches
of the Legislature, and at the same time explained
some of the causes to which the acknowledged
evils were ascribable. But glaring as were these
errors, ridiculous as they appeared even to the
most superficial observer, they occasioned far less
mischief than the adoption of words of doubtful
construction, which arrayed Judge against Judge,
and even one of the Superior Courts against
another, to the perplexity and confusion of the
unfortunate suitor, who felt the hardship of being
compelled to pay for settling the law, and de-
ciding by the judgment of the highest appellate
tribunal the serious difference between the Courts
of Common Pleas and Exchequer as to whether
the word " may" in the County Courts Act had
been used in a discretionary or imperative sense.
Simple as the matter may now be regarded, the
law has been, we believe, in an unsettled state
for many years ; and it is not yet, we believe,
definitively disposed of as to whether words
of permission, as " may," or "it shall be
lawful," Arc., are to be so construed as affording
any option to the Judge, or allowing him to de-
termine as he thought most in accordance with
the justice and equity of the case. The difficulty
could, with a very little care, be most easily
avoided ; but, as it was, it led to the greatest an-
noyance and vexation, inducing " sharp practi-
tioners" to bring actions in the Superior Courts,
on the chance of receiving costs far exceeding the
amount of the original debt, through the obscurity
occasioned by the wording of the statute.

While, then, it is most desirable that adequate
means should be adopted to prevent a repetition
of such ludicrous and injurious mistakes, it must
be Obvious that the intended digest or consolida-
tion of the statutes would be of comparatively
little utility, unless the existing contradictions
and obscurities were removed, and the law
stated in a more intelligible manner. We
must at all times receive any observation
of Lord ST. LEONA RDS with respect ; but
with great deference to the Learned Lord,
we submit that a mere alteration of the
language, so as to remove existing doubt, could
not be considered as so far altering the nature
and character of the work as to render it a new
code, rather than a consolidation of previous enact-
ments; but even were it the case, it could scarcely
afford a sufficient reason for
and permit
tunities for amendment, avoiding the oppor-
blots much longer to deface the nating such gross
tional statute-
book.

Extraordinary credit, we cannot help re'
is due, we conceive, to the Honourable Geasti ntleman
entleman
the Member for the borough of Lewes, in
refer-
ence to that bill, which he has now obtained leave
to introduce, for the better prevention and punish-
ment of aggravated assaults upon women and
children. It was time, indeed, for some such in-
terference on the part of the Legislature. The
columns of the public journals had been too fre-
quently polluted, especially of late years, by the
record of these lamentable acts of brutality, for
the expiation of which the law hitherto allowed
but very inadequate and restricted power to the
provincial or metropolitan magistracy. According
to the existing system, as explained in the House
of Commons on Thursday evening by Mr. FITZROY,
all the punishment that can be inflicted upon the
offenders here especially referred to, is limited to
a fine of 51., or, in default of payment, two
monibs' imprisonment. It must be remembered,
moreo -
er, that this imprisonment must he without
lolfardblaebeueri
even though the cruelty complained
and
.heightenedb the
most inhuman description,
y themost revolting c
i
r
c
u
m
-
stances.
in the way of im-
mediate alteration Something,; therefore,asimpetively demanded