The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-19 00:00:00

the opinion of the law advisers to be taken on it. They
had given it as their opinion that it was utterly impossible
to come to the conclusion from the words of ihe act that
the clerks were entitled to receive out of the ft nds in court
such sums of money as in the aggregate would be equal to
the fees and salaries of which they were in receipt at the
time the act came into operation. They dded that these
gentlemen had a strong moral claim upon the consider-
ration of Parliament, but that the Lord Chancellor had no
power to apply any part of the fund mentioned in the
26th section in payment of the claim. In this state of
things the only course open to these genttlemen was to
accept the salaries he had offered them or to apply to Par-
liament for relief. He had done all in his power for them,
and regretted he could not altogether relieve them from
the position in which they were placed.
Lord CRANWORTII gave his noble and learned friend
full credit for having done all in his power to obtain for
these gentlemen that to which they had not only a moral
right, but which it would be a disgrace to Parliament to
withhold from them. In the select committee the subject
had come under discussion, and the Lord Chancellor (Lord
Campbell) had assured them that the clerks transferred
were fully provided for, and that the words of the act were
amply sufficient for their protection. The words were that
they were to receive their full salaries as nearly as might
be out of the same funds. He merely rose to express his re-
gret at the present position of the officers, and to say that,
as a member of the committee, he should feel the result a
sort of humiliation if Parliament did not step in and give
these gentlemen full relief.
The Earl of DERBY said that having sat as a member
of the committee, he could bear testimony to the matter of
fact just stated by the noble and learned lord. He perfectly
recollected that it had been pointed out that a very small
portion of the remuneration of these gentlemen arose from
salaries, the meter portion arising from fees—that, in con-
sequence, they might be placed in a very great difficulty;
and I remember hearing the noble and learned lord who
then occupied the woolsack state that full and ample provi-
sion had been made for them.

Lord CHELMSFORD said that compensation could only
be given to officers whose offices were abolished, and whose
services were dispensed with, but these were efficient and
acting officers, entitled to their full salaries, the words of
the act being, "the salaries, remuneration, allowances, and
compensation, which they now respectively receive." These
were to be paid, "as nearly as might be out of the same
funds" as before. But suppose there were no funds, surely
the salaries of the officers should still be paid. He thought
that great injustice had been done those persons, and as
there had been clearly no intention to deprive them of the
amount which they had theretofore been in receipt of, he
trusted that no time would be lost by the Government in
introducing a bill in the House of Commons to afford those
gentlemen that to which they were entitled.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said his noble and learned
friend seemed to think that he argued against the claim of
these unfortunate men. :He never intended to do any such
thing. He merely stated the grounds on which the law
officers of the Crown arrived at their conclusion. He should
be sincerely happy if the construction of the act by the two
noble and learned lords were the legal construction. For
himself he had no desire to press the language of the act.
He believed that the language used showed the intention
to give these gentlemen the fullest possible remuneration.
The only difficulty had been that words had been used
without adequately understanding them. He must say
that he never from the commencement had any doubt about
the propriety of giving these gentlemen full remuneration,
but he had no means of doing it. This question had been
discussed again and again, and he must leave these gen-
tlemen to bring forward their claims in the proper mode.
He hoped their lordships would agree with him, that with
the limited power he had, he could not have made them
a more liberal offer than giving them these appointments
in the Bankruptcy Court, where the salaries were larger.
But the officers of the bankruptcy oourts were paid by
salaries and not by fees, and upon that there had been
misapprehension, but that misapprehension ought
not to be used to do an injustice to those gentlemen. He
should be happy to find that the House of Commons adopted
the same view. As far as he was concerned, he should be
happy to recommend and promote any measure which
would give them that redress which, if he had been aware
of the whole circumstances when the act was passed, he
should himself have taken care to give.
Lord CHELMSFORD explained that what he said was,
that his noble and learned friend urged the words in the
act as the ground of his inability to give these gentlemen
the remuneration to which they were entitled,