The Sun.
London, England, 1831-09-21 00:00:00

an advocate. But the ere&
before the Commissioners,

any expence whatever.
common matter, the Come
act ; and it was only in a

obliged to apply to a prole
it had been objected to the
pensive, and exhausted the
had made inquiries intf, thi
and he tad found that who

opened, and the whole bus,
paid, the whole eapeneesdid not amount V, a par cent..._
io.
ef
sotn. e) farthingLess,hien
believedtl e iou,
iA
lBa°lTfeul
t.n.. He knew thatndthoon
wtohuelddihvaidseeie6,;3—.ll(aHideatro
one broker, on a single transacfl ,
to the poor binkrupt or creditor. He did not mean to say
cfaeseess, tobte
bad
mtsmuiesnsiotnheerisn h a
inil
orderreccos ttoot,atnke
tthheemir
that this system was unsusceptihie of amendment. He
had himself proposed some amendment in it. He had
proposed, that at meetings where one Commissioner
would be sufficient, only one should attend; and that the
three Commissioners should attend only on the adjudi.-
c ition of the bankruptcy, and on proof of dates, where
there were disputed claims. This was a rraade in which
he h .d proposed to diminish the expence ;,!,and he bad
also proposed that three of the Commissioners should sit
from day to day, far difficult points. His Noble and
Learned Friend appeared to consider the evil a existing
among the London Commissioners ; and yet, with regard
to the country Commissioners, he had done little more
than elevate them to the foating of the London Commis-
sioners. His Noble and Learned Friend had begun at the
wrong end ; for he ought to have corrected the system as
far as it applied to the country Commissioners, and then
directed his attention to the London Commissioners. But
nothe did
objectmea n
as t o
advantageously "wouldatnootahserthseystpemtesent.What
he effect
samethe
verywith was,
superiorthat
un less
advantages,aniither system t‘evmo
tasdh ohteddhbe
teteett
to
attended
here to the exiting system, and to see whether it would
' admit of improvement. He did not ipprove of an altera-
tion in the existing system, unless it should be proved that
another system would be attended with manifestly decided
(

advantage. Having said this much as to the Commis—
sioners and to the system, See now what Win the System
proposed by his Noble and Learned Friend oa the Wool-

sack. If their Lordships thought that the pr-sent system
nrought ill then they ►night be disposed to adopt the pro-
posed system, and then see what it was. Firs, as to the
point of cheapness, the propo.,ed Court was to consist of a

Chief Justice, with a salary of 3,000/. a year, and then
there were to be three Puisne Judges, with a salary of

2,0001. a year each. Then there were to be six other: in-
fe.rior Judges, called Commissioners with 1,5001. a year
—not temporary Judges adapted to the occasions, but per-
manent Judges. So here were ten new Judges to be :►p-

pointed, whose salaries on the whole would amount to
18,0001. a year—a number short only by two of
all the Judges who did the whole common law business of
the kingdom. Then there were to be two Rezibtrars, at
8001. a year each, and eight Deputy Re2istrars, at 6001.

a year each, so the expense of these officers would amount
to 6,4001. per annum. Then theie were to be thirty
ether officers selected, not from the legal procession, but
from the commercial classes, under the name of assignees.

The amount of the salaries of these assignees was not
stated, as they were to be paid by a certain commission,
and they were left to ascertain the amount of the remu-
neration the best way they could. His Noble and Learned
Friend bad said, however, that he intended to draw these
assignees from that class of persons who were usually sum-
moned to attend on Grand Juries ; but, without meaning

any disp iragement to them, be might say that they were
persons who were not disposed to work for nothing.
When any of them were chosen as an arbiter in the city
of London, he generally charged more for his troul.le than
any gentleman at the bar, and then it came to this, that
each of these assignees must have '7OO/. a year to induce
him to undertake the office, so that the salaries of the
whole of them would amount to 22,0001. a year. The

result of the whole was, that the expence of all this ma-
chinery would amount to 48,000/. a year. Still the
expence ought not to be deemed a valid objection, if
the public service demanded it ; but it was obvious that
a clear case of advantage ought to be made out before
such a system was adopted. Another con,ideration was
the extensive patronage which this would confer on the in-
dividual holding the Great Seal. Here were 50 new ap-
pointments to be at his diposal, and that too at a time
when in other great offices of state the patronage
had been niuch diminished, or bad ceased altogether.

He was sure that his Noble and Learned Friend did not
value the patronage, but looked to much higher ob-
office looked to patronage as a great object. It was, how-
ever, in reality, only an addition, and a most troublesome
addition, to the duties of the station.—(Loon CHAN-
CELLOR-" Hear, hear.") But then they had to consider
in what light it was regarded by the world, and what the
wand in general would think of such a patronage so in-
creased. It was no answer to this reasoning to say that
seventy offices were abolished when only fifty were substi-
tuted, for these fifty offices were new offices to be all filled up
at once. He had thought it his duty to throw out
these observations, and it was for their Lordships to con-
sider to what weight they were entitled. But as to th e
system proposed by his Noble and Learned Friend, he,
for his part, did not see any advantage in it over the pre-
sent system, but rather a disadvantage. The present Com-
missi.mers did their duty in the simplest and plainest
manner, and these duties were almost all Ministerial, ex-
cept in regard to the adjudication of bankruptcy, and the
proof of disputed debts. As to the adjudication of bank-
ruptcy, by his Noble and Learned Friend's system, one
of his Commissioners or Judges was to deride the points
whereas, by the present system, that point was usually de-
cided by three of the Commissioners. It was true that
the one Commissioner, under the new system, might calt
two others to his assistance, and then there would
be an adjudication by three ; but so it was by the
present system, and be saw no reason to alter that
for a system which was not better, and might be
worse. Then it ought to be considered that the adjudi-
cation of bankruptcy was made ex-parte ; but by the pre-
sent system the party might appear to theViee-Chancellor,
or, more properly speaking, to the Lord Chancellor ; and
what was the result ? The appeals were heard by the
Vice-Chancellor immediately ; for every thing else gave
way to them. By the proposed system the appeal was to
be to a Court of Review, consisting of three of the su-
perior Judges. Now, he appealed to their Lordships whe-
ther that Court would constitute a better tribunal for the
purpose than that of the Vice• Chancellor ; and if it was
not better, where was the occasion for this change? Then
as to the state of the law on this subject—if a man was
declared bankrupt, he might at present bring his action.
When a man was adjudged a bankrupt, he was, by an ex-
parte decision, divested of the whole of his property ; but
be had the power to bring the question for trial into a
Court of Law ; and he might bring it in the highest
Courts—in the Court of King's Bench, where he would
have the opinion of the Chief Justice of England. This
was the state of the law at present. If he should be de-
clared bankrupt ex-parte, he might bring his action against
the messenger, or any one who meddled with his property;
and be could call on the Chief Justice of the Court of
King's Bench to give his opinion on the question, and to
adjudge it ; and he might have the assistance of the ablest
scholars and advocates to conduct his cause. Now, it was
not an advantage, but a great disadvantage, to deprive
the subject of this remedy.—(Hear, hear.) Then
what did his Noble and Learned Friend substitute for
this ? He proposed to send an issue of fact to be tried
by a Judge. Why an issue of fact ? Why not an issue
of fact or of law ? Why was it to be tried, in the last
resort, before the new Court of Review, instead of
before the highest tribunals in the country ? Suppose
he were anxious to try the question before the Chief Jus-
tice, he could not, by the new system, have that advan-
tage, but must be contented with this new Court of Re-
view. This was not an improvement, but the contrary.
But he had another objection to this part of the plan.
The party wishing to try the question was to be obliged
to give security for costs. So that, when a man of very
great wealth should be deprived of the whole of his pro-
perty, he could not get the question tried in the Court of
Review without giving security for costs. Security, by
whom ? By a man who bad been previously stripped of
the whole of his property—security by a man who had
been deprived of all the means of giving security. This
was no improvement, but the reverse. Another circum-
stance to be considered, was one which he ought to have
mentioned before, but had forgotten it. The two main
points to be adjudicated by the Commissioners were the
bankruptcy and the proof of debts. He did not see hew this
could be better done by his system than it was done by
the present Commissioners. Suppose a question of sr
count to arise in a cause in the Court of Kings 131'ne'!'
~,ne description
of the
what sort of persons would be there selected in
the account? Precisely persons
, Bas to the final
as the present Commissioners. Then,
Commissioners
examination of the bankrupt.
Thaeol3: who were employed
were exactly the description 01:r
the Courts of Law ;
in the examination of wi
Cese.rstem Was not only as good
and here again the present 0
Iseti to substitute for it, but
as that which
W.lB ;id Pto this new system on another
better. Then he objec e
d The whole of the business which at present
groan • order to settle

! to employ a solicitor and
Teditor himself pretested himself
rs, and proved his debt without
If he was at a lost about any
Imissioners directed him how to
a case of dafieulty that he was
fessional agent for advice. But,
e estate ha fees for lawyrts.
le system, that it was vcry ex- .
he proceedi.lgs 04-one of .tie lists
here sixty coolmissionkiven
usiness done, a,,d the dividends