The Sun.
London, England, 1831-10-15 00:00:00

BANKRUPTCY COURT BILL.

The LORD CHANCELLOR presented a petition from
an individual who had experience in the working of the
present bankruptcy system of law, praying their Lordships
to pass the Bankruptcy Court Bill. Their Lordships had
passed it, and it was now in the other House. He took
this opportunity of mentioning that he heard with great
concern that misapprehensions «ere entertained, and
cavils uttered out of this House, in another place, he would
not say where, as to his motives for being so anxious to
get this Bill passed. It bad been said by a person of great
ability, and a friend of his, that it looked as if he had been
by this Bill snatching at a patronage of 26,0001. a-year,
besides the patronage of the Great Seal. Nothing could
be more unfounded than such an idea, for, instead of
wishing to snatch at additional patronage, be had only sub-
stituted a patronage of 18,0001. a-year for one of 3.5,000/.,
and besides sacrificed the patronage of two sinecure places
of 12 or 14,000/. a-year. The Bill made a great diminu-
tion in the patronage and advantages now belonging to the
office of Lord Chancellor. It was well known that by
means of those places former Chancellors had been enabled
to provide handsomely for their families ; and the
Thorlow family had enjoyed a sinecure of 10,0001.
a-year for more than half a century. Other Judges
also had provided for their families and relations,
by means of sinecures of from 3,0001. to 4,0001. per
annum. But these advantages he was willing to sacrifice,
in order to give the public the benefit, which he was
convinced they would derive from the passing of this Bill
into a law. If, therefore, any one had said that this Bill
was to increase the patronage of the Lord Chancellor, most
certainly that was not an imputation that could deservedly
be applied to him. Something had been said about patro-
nage being wanted, in order to have a hold of the bar.
He did not want to have a hod of the bar. All that he
wanted was to do the: business of the suitors to whom it
was his duty principally to look. If lie had wanted to
have a hold of the bar, the best way to keep that hold
would be to retain at his disposal '7O places, any of which
he might give to any one the moment he put a gown on
his back, whether he was fitted for it or not. As to the
patronage of five or six places under this Bill, about which
so much had been said, lie was perfectly indifferent about
it. Let any one else appoint to these places. Let the ap-
pointment be in the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, the
Ilenchers of Lincoln's Inn, the Lords Commissioners of
the Treasury—which last personages would perhaps be the
most proper to hold the patronage. But although he was
very indifferent about the patronage, he took great interest
in the Bill, because he thought it of great importance to
the public that it should pass. It might be material, also,
in reference to something which had passed in another
place, to state that there was not a single thing included in
this Bill, regarding either principle or detail, but what he
had most amply explained to his colleagues. He had most
thoroughly explained the principle and various provisions
of the Bill to his colleagues, not merely at a Cabinet
meeting, for that was nothing—(A laugh)—he meant that
such meetings were principally devoted to other mat-
ters—but he had explained the Bill to them, not merely
at these meetings, but privately, more particularly to his