The Sun.
London, England, 1822-06-27 00:00:00

RECORD COMMISSIONERS (IRELA.Np), &c.

• - - -
The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE stated, that what.he said
on a.forMer evening had been misunderstood, in
to the Commissioners•of Courts_ of Justice in 11.7glarul, respect-
ivhorri he-had no complaint whatever to ma,..WOurthe con-
trary) by their persevering exertions, they had produced a sav-
ing to the public of upwards of 60,0001. per annum in the Court
of -Ekchequer alone, and there was every season to believe that
a considerable further saving would be effected ; and he wished
to impress Upon the Noble Earl opposite the great utility that
might prise from instituting: inquiries in Ireland.. What he
alluded..to'bn a former evening was the Commissioners of Re-
cords-in Ireland, appointed in 1810, who had Incurred a large
amount of expence, without,,as far as he could learn, any cor-
responding advantage, •and he moved on the 22d, May, for arr
Account of the expences of that Commission since 1820, but
which had not yetibeen laid upon the Table.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL sai4:.the Government were, not
inattentive to the subject -of-inquiries in Ireland ; an Act-had
-passed last Session: for the p'pose o,f instituting an inquiry into
the various. branches of the-revenue in -Ireland,,which there was
every reason to believe would be productive of' ninth utility.
With 'regard to the account alluded to, he had mentioned the
non-production of it to his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary for
Ireland,. who had in con Sequence written there., but there had
not yet been time to receive an answer.

Tjhe Marquis WDOWNBIII,ItE expressed himself satisfied
with what had been stated by the Noble-Earl.

MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

The Order of the Day having been moved by Lord ELLEN-
BOROUGH, the Earl of Shaftesbury presented the Report of
the Marriage Act Amendment Bill, with Amendments.
The LORD CHANCELLOR expressed his approbation of
the provisions introduced, with a view prospectively to prevent
improper Marriage, upon the priiiciple, that a marriage once
contracted pught,to be indissoluble. His Lordship then pro-
ceeded at 'considerable length to state objections to the retro-
spective part of the Bill ; his motion for the postponement of
the considkration of which he regretted their Lordships refused
to agree to, as he thought the retrospective enactments had, in
point of fact, no connexion with the prospective, clauses, and
that they ought to form a separate Bill. - These retrospective
enactments went to make valid (with certain exceptions) all
marriages that had taken place by license-since 1754, the date
of the Marriage Act, which would otherwise, under the Opera-
t:on of that Act, be deemed null and void. But their Lord-
ships should be aware, that whilst these enactments went, ge-
nerally. speaking, to legalize the marriages of the superior
classes of society-that had taken place by license, they took no
notice whatever of the other classes who had been married by
banns, and who, in-the case of fraudulent banns, were left to
all the consequences of, void marriages, and the bastardizing of
issue. His Lordship stated several cases in which the retro-
spective enactments, as they at present stood,' would operate
most injuriously with regard to the rights of parties now en-
titled to property, in consequence of the invalidity of mar-
riages, which would now be rendered valid, and where they
had sold their Reversionary, Interest, by taking the property
from those in possession of it, and who had purchased it, but
who would have no remedy against any one for the money
which they thus lost, together with the property. Ile con-
cluded by reading several amendments and provisos, which,
if their Lordships decided to enact the retrospective clause,
he should propose in a subsequent , stage. The principal ob-
jects of these amendments and provisos were to declare all
those marriages invalid which had been decided to be so in
actions or suits in Courts of Law or Equity, and to enact that
the rendering marriages valid as proposed, should "not affect
any deeds or instruments respecting•-property settled or sold,
under the belief that such. marriages were null and void.
Lord ELLENI3OROUGH said he had felt much anxiety
on- finding all the talent, the judgment and the learning of the
Noble and Learned Lord arrayed against him with regard to
this Bill; but that anxiety had been much diminished after,
hearing the Noble and Learned Lord, as he found that the
Noble and. Learned Lord's objections were little more than
what had occurred to himself. He could see no reason for a
separation of the prospective and retrospective parts of the Bill,
having gone on unanimously to enact that certain forms being
complied with, marriages contracted in future should be indis-
soluble, he thought the.more natural course was to apply this
principle to the marriages which had taken place, but which
under the Marriage Act would be invalid. He did not believe
that under the operation of these retrospective enactments, evils
would arise in any degree equal to those which had arisen, and
were every day increasing, in consequence of the operation of
the Marriage Act. And he was satisfied that the adopting the
principle of the indissolubility of marriage as the principle of
our law would be in every point of view most conducive to
the peace, the happiness, and the morality of society. He
trusted their Lordships would pass the retrospective clause,
upon which he was confident the happiness not only of
one, but of many families, the quieting of apprehensions,
the security of property, and the =orals:of the country de-
pended.
The LORD CHANCELIBIiMoved that the retrospective
clause be left out, merely to'put his opinion upon record.
The Earl of HARROWBY said, the retrospective clause
was calculated to quiet the apprehensions of families, but at the
same time affected the property of others, who, as the Noble
and Learned Lord stated, were not in the situation of having
violated the existing laws. The Noble Lord opposite (Ellen-
borough) had expressed a desire to concur in the amendments
of the Noble and Learned Lord, and he certainly thought that
the retrospective clause, so modified, was likely to confer great
benefit on the country. He thought it would be better to move
the amendments now since, if they were carried, the objections
of many Noble Lords, who would otherwise oppose the retro-
spective clause, might be removed.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, .he could have no ob-
jection to the course proposed by the Noble Lord (Harrowby).
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that though he had no
difficulty in declaring that he was for a retrospective clause, yet
he was against such a clause affecting suits actually pending.
After a short conversation respecting the mode of putting the
question, in which Lord Redesdale, the Earl of Rosslyn, bar).
Grey, and Lord Lauderdale participated, the question, that the
retrospective clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill, was
put, and agreed to without a division.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL moved, as an Amendment to
the first proviso, that this Act do not extend to any marriage,
with respect to the validity of which any suit is now pending.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN said, that if there were a
class of persons entitled to the. protection of their Lordships,
it was those who had contracted marriages, under an ignor-
ance of the operation of one of the most mischievous and im-
moral laws that had ever disgraced the legislature of the coun-
try. He was prepared to go back to every case where no actual
possession had been created by the sentence of a Court of Law,
and he should, therefore, oppose the Amendment of the Noble
Lord.
The Earl of WESTMORLAND opposed the Amendment.
—There were two classes of persons,who would be affected by
this measure, one class who were seeking to avoid, and the
other to confirm, their contracts by resorting to a Court of Law,
and the effect of his Noble Friend's amendment would be to de-
prive the latter class of the power of carrying into effect an hon-
ourable intention of confirming existing engagements.
The House then divided on the Amendment—
Contents, 28— Non-Contents, 67 —Majority against the
Amendment, 39.
After a short conversation, in which Lord Ellenborough, the
Earl of Harrowby, the Earl of Rosslyn, and Lord Holland par-
ticipated, the Report was ordered to be taken into further con-
sideration on Fnday.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
MISCELLANEOUS.
The committal of the Scotch Juries Bill was postponed un-
til to-morrow.
Mr. CURWEN presented a petition from Robert Wood,
Esq. late a Lieutenant-Colonel in the Army, praying (as we

understood) some compensation for services rendered to the
Army. . •
Lord PALMERSTON said the statement of the petitioner
was untrue. Ile•was a defaulter to the amount of 8,0001. ; his
commission had been sold, and the money in the hands of his
agents-seized towards making good this sum ; but the money
raised was not more than 4,7001., so that he was still a debtor to
the public in 3,3001.; and it was only on account of his circum-,
Stances that the claim had.nst been enforced.
Mr. LENNARD spoke in favour of the petitioner's claim.
The petition was then ordered to lie on the table ; but
Lord PALMERSTON resisted the motion that it be print-
ed, on the ground that the petition had stated that which was
unfounded in fact.
Colonel DAVIES said the practice resorted to in this case
was a part of the system of discharging Officers from the ser-
vice without a court-martial, and he should bring the subject
under the notice of the House.
Mr. HUSKISSON said he was sld enough to recollect the
petitioner being &Member of that House, and certainly he con-
stantly supported the Administration of the day. This was
when Mr. Windham was Secretary at War; and it was not to
be supposed that that Administration had wantonly taken away
the commission of one of their supporters.

Mr. HUME supported the petition."
Mr. H. G. BENNET said the printing of petitions had ori-
ginally been considered as a matter of right. He cautioned
the House not to adopt the new doctrine of -the Noble Lord,
which would have the effect of gagging the people.
Lord PALAIERSTON said, that still assuring the House
that the petition contained an untrue statement, he would not
give the House the trouble of dividing on the. question.
Mr. WI NN said the printing of petitions was entirely dis-
cretionary in the House. .
The petition was then .ordered tube printed.
HIGHGATE CHAPEL.
Mr. BYNG moved for leave to bring in a Bill to authorise
(as was understood) the pulling down of Highgate Chapel; and
erecting another.in its stead.
Mr. Alderman Wow) opposed, and Sir JAMES GRAHAM
-supported. the Motion.
A conversation of some length followed between several Hon.
Members, in the course of which Mr. Wetherell, Mr. P.
Moore; Dr. Lushington, Sir James Mackintosh, and Mr. Ser-
geant Onslow supported, and Mr. Hume, Mr. Abercromby,
Mr.' C. Calvert, Sir R. Wilson, Mr. Ricardo, the Attorney-
General, and Sir J. -Newport opposed it.
The House then divided, when there appeared—

For the Motion . - 57
Against it - . 29
Majority - -—2 B
. SALT TAX.

Mr. LYTTLETON presented a Petitiop from the Proprie-
tor of a Salt Pit in Chester, complaining of the retention of
the two shillings duty on Salt.—Ordered to lie on the table
and be printed.
SCOTTISH PRESS. '

. Mr. ABERCROMBIE gave notice, that he should to-mor=
row move for Copies of the proceedings in the Scottish Courts
between Alexander and Borthwick, and of the Criminal Pro-
ceedings instituted against Borthwick.
YEOMANRY. _ .

Mr. HUME, after referring to the allowances made to the
different Yeomanry Corps, moved for. Returns of the Claims
made by the Bedford, Bucks, Essex, London, and Devon,
within the last year. •
Mr. DAWSON opposed . the motion. The regulations
affecting the Yeomanry were general, and the selection of
particular districts appeared to convey a censure upon them.
Captain MABERLY declared his intention of voting for the
motion, because, as an office: of a Yeomanry Corps, he thought
it would throw a slur upon that corps to wish to: withhold any
information asked for.
Colonel MACQUEEN wished to know if the Hon. Member-
for Aberdeen would state the authority upon which he had been
induced to make this motion. •
Mr. HUME said, that this was a question the Hon. Member
was by no means entitled to put.
Colonel MACQUEEN said that as far as he was concern-
ed, as Colonel of the Regiment which had been alluded toi
he could have no objection to give every information in his
power.
Lord ALTHORP spoke in favour of the motion.
Mr. WYNN observed, that the present motion could not be
agreed to without bearing an invidious meaning.
The Marquis of CHANDOS. defended the Bucks Yeo-
manry.
Mr. HUME said he thought the circumstance of the Bucks
Yeomanry charging so much as they had done for coming up to
the Coronation, was sufficient to warrant their making an in-
quiry on this subject...
Lord PALMERSTON felt himself quite at a loss to under-
stand upon what Parliamentary ground the Hon. Member
made his motion. It might be satisfactory to the Honourable
Member to . know that not one of the cbrps he had selected for
his return had received one shilling for the year 1821, except for
permanent duty.—(Hear !)—The pay for that was 53. a-day,
and nothing had been paid to them for suppressing riots.
Mr. DAWSON explained.
The Marquis of CHANDOS explained.
Mr. BENNET contended that there was nothing invidious
in the motion of his Honourable Friend. He expressly stated
that he called for Returns with regard to these particular Regi-
ments, because it appeared that they were more expensive than
others.
After a few, words from Mr. MoNcx, Mr. HUME, and Mr.
DawsoN, the motion was withdrawn, upon an understanding
that the deficiency in point of -information in the present ac-
counts should be supplied._. .A

COURT OF CHANCERY.
Mr. M. A. TAYLOR said, that having on former occasions
called the attention of the House to this subject, he could not
be expected to go largely now into it. His former motion had
been negatived by four.votes only. There was something essen-
tially wrong in the constitution of the Court of Chancery and of
the High Appeal Courts, particularly as to expence and delay.
The oppression on the suitors in equity was enormous. Why,
it would be said, were there no petitions on the table ? There
was such a terror of that jurisdiction, vested in the breast of one
individual, as to cause all petitions to be prevented. He had
had numberless applications to himself personally. He pledged
his honour that he knew many cases of the greatest oppression,
although the interest of the parties prevented all chance of their
being publicly known. A person having been left a' 23th share
of a property near Islington, for which he calculated he would
receive 12001. a friendly suit to decide the property had been
instituted, and after twelve years a decree gave him 4501. out of
the property, as the expence of his share had been 7501. The
House Kuld not forget that there had been 28 shares. He could
quote several other cases equally oppressive. He had no per-
sonal interest in the amelioration of the Courts—he wished as a
Legislator to replace the two Courts in such a situation as to be
useful to all the suitors in obtaining justice. Was his object not
a good one ? He would ask the opposers of his motion to place
their hands upon their hgarts, and say whether they thought that
no injustice was committed through the present constitution of
those Courts ? Sir S. Romily had foreseen, on the appointment
of the. Vice Chancellor, all the baleful effects of that appoint-
ment. VariOus other men of great_ abilities had objected to that
measure. That Bill had been enacted in an evil hour, for it
had already been productive of great evils.—The business of
the Great Seal was so far in the Court of Chancery, to admini-
ster to suitors in equity at as cheap and quick a rate as possible.
What would Lord Hardwick say if he now saw the change,
when you could only get at the Great Seal through the Vice
Chancellor, at twice the expense and three times the delay ?
The great talents of Lord Eldon were so used elsewhere, that
he could not, though acting constantly, deipatch the publiC buSir_
ness. The truth was, that he was called to attend every Conn,'
cil, and was more engaged as a statesman than a lawyer,—
Look at the prophecy of Sir S. Romilly ; he said the altera-
tions of the Court would alter the functions of the Chancellor,
leaving him that in name, but the least of his business would
be in the Court of Chancery. What was thus said, he (Mt.
M. A. Taylor) could prove true if figures spoke an intelligible
language. In saying this he meant nothing against Sir John
Leach, but he must do his duty. In the last eight years and
a half only fifty-three causes were heard by the Lord Chan-
cellor, and in the Vice Chancellor's Court, 2,533. Well, was
not that withdrawing the business from the Great Seal ?
Eight years he was occupied in hearing 157 appeals from both
the Courts. Now there were 109, rather 100 appeals to hear,
which would require four years to hear at the same pro-
portion ; so that appellant suits, after going' through all
the horrors of an equity process, would still have four years
to pass through before they could be settled. It should be
admitted that many important motions were settled ; but he
stood upon the appeal. The suitor should not be put to the
double expense of a suit before the Vice-Chancellor and one also
before the Chancellor. He put it to Gentlemen on all sides of

'the House, whether those niatters'did not recitiiie a remedy ? If
such delays occurred with the present Lord 'Chancellor, what
would it be with others of leis diligence ? 'With resPect to mo-
tions, 5145 motions were heard by thelAird Chancellor in eight
years, and what was Clone in the Vice-Chancellor's Court? He
heard 14,960, not motions of course, bnt acthal inotions-. These
motions he w i shed the Registrar to dist inguish 'fact, thethan-
cellor lamented the motions Sent up 'from the dice-Chancellor,
a statement of which was alinost daily to be foutid in the public
prints. On the. subject of motions in the iiew Court; Sir
Samuel Romilrhad said nothing,as appeals *Add increase in .
consequence of its erection,' and the staterbent'Of numbers' he
now made justified that prophecy.' Not only harithe motions
increased, but expense and delay went-on with that increase
-almost hanclin hand: The result 'of the Creation of this new
CoUrt was, that suitors really had-not that justice done them
which they had a right to expect. The Chancellor could not
hear all the motions
.he otherwise would have heard, and that
-because of his attention being 'divided between so many objects.
The Vice-Chancellor now generally 'took the new motions--
the result of Which was an increase iii the 'appeals. 'With re-
spect to exceptions, there were nine in Chancery 37, in the
Vice-Chancellor's Court 156 and that during the same Period..
The petitions in Chancery were 4071 ;i in the Vice-Chancellor's
Conrt23so. There was veil, little use; 'perhaps, in going into
this detail,. except inasmuch as it chewed the evil of drawing
the, Chancellor from his: proper place. He (iH: T.) endea-
voured many Years ago to leave with the Chancellor 'only the
business of the Great Seal, and relieve him from the bank-
ruptcy: But the Noble Lord said " no ;‘ the consideration of;
these cases reentires great talent and much experience, and must-
not be rashly touched." He:admitted the clearness rind- pre-'.
cision Of, the Noble Lord; but still he Wished' that the 'duty
imposed on the Lord Chane'ellor by the Statute of Eliza-
beth should be separated from that which constitutionally be.:
longed to the Great Seal. That object, however, was con-
stantly resisted In this House. Bankruptcy, cases, as well
as others, ' were now referred to the Vice-Chancellor, and
from Him back again to the Chancellor, and of course expense
and delay almost necessarily following. He (Mr. M. A. T.)
wished the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Londonderry) was 'Per-
sonally cognizant of the horrors of these things, though he
hoped personally he never would ; but still he could assure the
Noble Lord, that it would be better for him, labonous as his
duties were in this House, to continue its sitthigs-twO maths'
longer in every year, rather than undergo the ansdetyand misery
of a suit in Chancery. For his own part, he merely* wished to
state facts, and let Gentlemen decide the case 'upon its real
merits. The evils of the Court were not df an'insulated cha-
racter, as to the mere suppliants of that Gant. - No one knew
when he might be dragged through the 'horrors of that equity
ordeal—perhaps be ousted of their fortunes and to those who,
wished their accordance he offered this merciful thition. Now
a word as to the appellant jurisdiction in the Utilise of Lords.
He held in hiS hand a list of the causes heard sii*e the appoint-
ment of the Vice-Chancellor, and as new brooms generally
swept clean, there was a greater exertion to clear them off. Al-
ter 11 years standing, 'there werdcleared off, in the first year of
the Vice-Chancellor's appointment, 66 causes ; in the 2d, 82; a
considerable number; 3d, ; 4th, 42 ; sth, 35 6th, 27 ; 7th;
41 ; Bth, 22 ; 9th, 46; such was the state of 'appeals up to the
10th May,.1822. There now remained to be heard of appointed
appeals, 122 ; not appointed, 35 ; so that takillgThe gross num-
ber and the average rate at which they were heard, it would still
require four year 3 to clear them off: Ought snitors to be sub-
jected to such a state of things? - It appeared that Scotch ap-
peals could not be attended to at all ; and he Heard it rumoured
thasoine intermediate tribunalwas in contemplation for the pur-
pose of saving the terrible expense to.whieb parties were now ex-
posed.' The Lord Chancellor had more than he could do, what
• with original causes, motions, petitions, and cases of bankrupt-
Cy ; and his (Mr. 111.2 L T.'s) Complaint was; theta man Of such,
great talents as the Lord Chancellor was not allowed to remain
in his own place.' The Judges of SCbtland now wished an in-
termediate tribunal, although some time'ago, when he called the
attention of the house to such u-rneasure, it was altogether
ne-
glected. The old constitutional principles of the Court should
be attended to, and the Chancellor not be drawn from his duties.
He (Mr. M. A. Taylor) did not wish to destroy the Vice-Chan.
cellor's Court at once, but he called uPon the. House to see if
something better could not be substituted in its Place. He called
upon them to say if his statements were not fully borne out—if
the suitors of the Court were as amply attended .to. as they had a
right to expect ? If they were not satisfied of the misery en-
tailed on thousands by the delay in cases of appeals, no language
of his, no powers of declamation, could possibly convince them.
If they were not satisfied, could they tell the country there was
no necessity for inquiry ? From conversations he had held with
the Great Seal, he hoped, and continued to hope:till very lately,
that he would originate himself some measure on this snhject.:
Lord Eldon said he did not like my plan ; but 1 replied I had
no particular plan ; that any plan was immaterial to me, pro-
vided the delay and expense attending suits were removed.—
And I further added, that until that were effected, I would
not cease from urging on some such measure. The Noble
Lord then wished me to delay the measure till after Easter._'
I did delay it; but he then told me, he shortly intended retir-
ing from the Great Seal—Ulcer, hear, and a„laugh from some
Members of the Oppositidn), and did not feel ,it, would be de-
licate to interfere, but would leave the matter to his suc-
cessor. I then said, no young Chancellor would be likely to
undertake it ; and in a conversation had with the Noble Lord
about a month ago, he said he would do nothing at all about it.
I replied, I was very sorry for it; and I told my Noble Friend.
—for so I shall always call that man for whom 1 have a very
great regard—that I myself would bring the su:iject before the
notice of Parliament. I principally mention this to account for
my not bringing it forward at an earlier period of the Session*
(Hear, hear !)-4 shall not further trespass on the patience of
the House than merely to state my motion, and that is—" That
this House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole house
to consider of the Act of the 53d Geo. 111. an Act intended to
facilitate the administration of justice ; I shall also move it, as
an instruction to the Committee, to limit the duration of the
Vice Chancellor's Court to a year or two, or some shortperiod."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not see that it was ne-
cessary for the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to call for a
Committee to inquire into this subject, as he seemed to have
made up his mind already as to what ought to be done. He
could not deny that proceedings in the Court of Chancery
were attended with considerable expense; but this was not the.
ground on which a Committee was called for, but the delay of
which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman complained. The
lion. and Learned Gentleman tl-tought the House ought to in-
• terfere to take away one branch of the Court, which, in,his
judgment, instead of ridding the business, contributed to the
delay. It had been said, that the Lord Chancellor was more a
Statesman than a Lawyer, and was frequently withdrawn front
the Court of Chancery to attend Cabinet Councils.—He there-
fore begged to say, that the occasions on which the Lord Chan-
cellor was so called away, were extremely, rare, and the'
time thus taken from Chancery was hardly. worthy of a
moment's consideration. With respect- to: ,the exertions made
by the Lord Chancellor himself, he begged to.. say, that few
Judges had so little observed what were called holidays as
he had. Such days he frequently devoted not to the gene-
ral business of the Court, but to the hearing of any particular
case that might press on him. To judge of 'What he did, it
would be better it the attention of the House, were directed to
the Returns on the table. From these it would appear that
there was little arrear in that Court but with respect to cases
of 4ppeal. He 'believed it would be found thainet cause stood
forkklicaring which had been set down anterior to the last
HZ believed such to be the fact. The appeals from
the 'Luce Chancellor's Court were considerable. in point
of numbers, but not more so than might be expected from
the number of causes there disposed of. But this, it was com-
plained, introduced a new practice in appeals on motions.—
It was, however, •to be remembered, that hearing these op-
, 'peals, in effect.,many of the causes themselves were heard
and disposed Of:' and, after all,. these appeals„ were in fact no
more than re-:hearings of the cause, which the Suitor would
have. 'a right to derrfand if his case had, been disposed of by the
Lord Chancellor hirnAelf. The Hon. and Learned. Gentleman
had made a compansonebetween the business. disposed of by
the Lord Chancellor an,. Vice Chancellor, and put it as
if the former had sat at lionw at his ease since the appointment
of, the Vice-Chancellor. 13.41 it should be recollected in the
first instance that the Lord Chancellor heard Appeals in the
House of Lords three days in the:Week. This, of course, left
him but half the time for the Coutt of Chancery, which the
Vice-Chancellor could give to his and' then it was well
known that most of the cases brought before the Lord Chan-
cellor were argued at great length, while .many .of those taken
before the Vice-Chancellor were not litigated! He would state
what the Lord Chancellor had done in 1821. Ile had disposed.
of 418 motions, 8 causes, 6 exceptions (the majiiity of the mo-
tions it should be stated were causes), 5 pleas and demurrers,
57 partnerships, 103 bankrupt and 245 lunatic.petitions, and
' in all 890 different matters had come before him. In 1020_the.

gtumbel -was -stillgrester, being 1015, and in 1819 it was 1111.
'lto Learned Gentleman referred to 1814. He (the Attorney-
kittneral) did not wish to avoid that year, but he had not the .
letarns at hand. In that year he believed the motions were
mere numerous, and that a number of bankrupt petitions con-
sie.trably greater had been disposed of. What he had stated
to i:st prove that the Lord Chancellor had not withdrawn-him-
self f:qm the business of Chancery on the appointment of a
Vier-Chancellor. Ile was much surprised to hear it said that
the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor had not tended to the
Eyetter dispatch of business. The number of appeals disposed
of in. he House of Lords in the ten years before the appoint-
.m:at of a Vice-Chancellor was 193. In the ten years subse.
--queet to his appointment (the 10 years were not vet completed)
tie number disposed of was 451. The Learned Gentleman
re f:.--rred to the few appeals disposed of in 1820. It was to he
reinerrOered how important were the subjects brought forward
in teat year. The Queensbury, Buccleugh, and Roxburgh
tt were then tinder consideration; and also the Strath.
~, reerage. The appeals from Scotland took up much
:, •-- and he ligreed with the Honourable Gentleman, that
Ii- :e, e.: continued, such as they had been of late, some
ee'::alar measure with respect to them might he necessary.
NG eti respect to Lunatic Petitions, there was no' arrear. In
ee- Cauees there was no arrear ; and in the Bankrupt Peti-
te et there was no arrear. It was only with respect to the
_--eeeels that any arrear was to be complained of. The ques-
tlee now before the House was this :—Had such a case
-nie:n made out as called for interferenCe on their part ? He
theaght no sticli case had been made. ut. Last year,' the
Learned Gentleman had submitted a plan to the House dif-
-ferent from that which he now offered, and he expected future
years would produce new plans from the same quarter. Ile
thea4it he would do better to bring it
-forward ia a regular
'teem at once, than to go on thus from year to year varying in 1
•ht.i taggestions. Last year the Learned Gentlemen proposed
that the Lord Chancellor should not sit in Chancery at all, ex-
acyt on very special occasions. This plan not having met with
the approbation of the House, he now wished to get rid of the
Vice-Chancellor, whose assistance had greatly diminished the
•,..r: ..z• of busheess. - The House had before tliem the business
whieh had been disposed of by the Lord Chancellor. He knew
ttie.t complaints had been raised against that Noble and Learn-
a el:ad, on account of delay. It was not for him to apologise
ler the conduct of the Lord Chancellor, but it was well known
te eve' one who practised in that Court, that the delay grew
-..it. of 'anxiet; to avoid doing injustice in his decisions, and
Le concurred -with the Noble Earl, in thinking that an incorrect
altteiaion would be productive of more inconvenience than re-
snieed'even from delay: Upon the whole, as he was of opinion
-alit no case had been made out for interfering with the Court
...r Chancery, he for one should give his opposition to the mo-
-,tien of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. ,
Mr. WILLIAMS said nothing could be more certain than.
-tbat no disresuect had been intended towards the Lord Chan-
„ctlior in bringing this subject forward. He should not add to
the authorizedyanegyrics which had been pronounced on that
very learned personage : ' first, because it was.unnecessary.;
„And, secondly, because when he had most frequent opportuni-
ties,of Witnessing the exertions of his talents, he had the pain to
-lee him in that most ambiguous situation, in which he united
the irreconcileable characters of'prosecutor and judge. Ile pro-
.tteeded to compare the procedings in the Court of Chancery and
in the Vice-Chancellor's Court. In the latter, of late years, the
Unkrupt petitions disposed of were about two to one, as corn-
fit.i6l with the number decided upon in the other Court, while
tl4 causes decided by the Vice-Chancellor were in the propor-
•ton of ten to one. The establishment of the Vice-Chancellor's
.Court had introduced an injurious practice, which had not be-
fore been known in the appeals on motions. The result of
.his was, that there were .107 appeals at this moment. He
should most decidedly vote for the mution of his Honourable
i Fiend.
....
Are. H. TWISS rose at the same time with Mr. WETIIE_
iEtt, and, proceeded, notwithstanding a general call for Alr
Wetherell: He was sorry to take precedence of his Hon. and
Learned Friend, but it would give his Hon. and Learned
riend the advantage of addressing the House when it would
_
less become him (Mr. Twiss) to do so. He would meet the
,charges on the other side, as manfully as the hardihood of their
.00urage could demtuid.:, Of 86 causes, the Lord Chancellor
had left the distressingi
,disheartening arrear, of two. There
was indeed one unfortunate, irremediable evil—that was the
pre-eminent, unrivalled character of the Lord Chancellor,which
encouraged and invited appeals to him. But he wished such an
-evil long to continue.
Mr. 5L A. TAYLOR replied. What he had stated re-
Mained unanswered, and .he would, year after year, take. the
43.. :li.. of the House upon the subject, if he should divide
-.eat two.

For the Motion -
.Against it - -
Majority against it -
PENSION BILL.

- -U%

Mr. CREEVEY rose to submit hig motion to the House
haVon the subject of the Bill of 1817, for granting Pensions to
Ute Officers, which was brought in by the lion. Member for
Corfe Castle. After referring to something which,had fallen
'from the Noble Marquis opposite relative to this subject upon
.aivaner occasion, he-stated that he was so satisfied of the un-
parliamentary nature and the iniquity of the Bill; that he
-ohOuld certainly divide the House upon it on the present
occasion. , He agreed with the Noble Lord, that he was not
',likely to carry his motion, but he felt that his allies were the
annLic opinion, and the publicity of their debates, and he should
iberefore• let the- country see what the true character of
etlns Bill was. • With this view he should not now move its
:ieal, but place upon the Journals a set of resolutions,
cjiring his sentiments upon the whole business. The first reso-
ioe on that it appeared to the House, that by an Act of
-tile fifty-seventh year of his late Majesty, a sum of forty-twoH
thothiand pounds per annum was charged in perpetuity upon
•the Consolidated Fund, for the payment of pensions to parti-
aa-derperwons holding particular offices in the State. The reso-
lotion went on to describe the Ministers and Officers entitled
IA; the.se Pensions by the Act of Parliament, after a service I
of- tint) years. Our Chief-JuStices were not entitled to Pen-
sion; until they had served fifteen years. But these, which
were made by the persons for themselves, were to become
dhe after g-service of two years.. The second and third
.re-
, snititlo4 were declaratory of the right of the Crown to re-
ward meritorious Officers, and the infringement of that right
• by the introduction of the ahove Bill, upon the recomtnentia-
ton of a Select Committee, composed of the pta'sons them-
-selves. This Select Committee was appointed in 1817,—a time
Of great public distress, to examine into the state of the Fi-
:Tunics with a view to relieve the people of some of their btu--
theca. Its first Report created these new Pensioners, and
left_the Crown nothing' but its
,Veto in the last resort, instead
of its right to grant such Pensions. Upon a late occasion,
-wnen a motion-was :made upon the subject of our Anibassa-
lop:. at Fotrelgn Courts, the Noble Marquis refused a Commit-
than and said he would never set his foot into one, because it
w euid disvigour the Monarchy. Because it would disvigour
the Monarchy.--(A laugh.)—Disvigoured the Monarchy it
was ; a terth he certainly never should have made use of him-
he*would tell the Noble Lord'that this
..h.et had not only disvigoured the Monarchy, but disgraced
Houee
,bud • defranded the public. The next resolution
ose,nt to affirm that there' was no precedent for such a measure.
loe-aff2, when the Xing sent ahnessage to the House to make
arzangement for his income, and gave up his existing rights,
thete was nothing .said. of any pensions for his Ministers.—
' The debt too was then 200,000,0001., and now it was become
W 0,00,0001. the Miniaters and the Hon. Member for Corte
:Castle 'cal-he down too--make this list of pensions for them-
solves. -lie did not rnean to move the repeal of this Act at
rr,r;--vent, but theeeresolutiOns pledged the House to take the
tier into its consideration-early in the next Session. ; The
resOliition -.declared this to be a Compact between the
l'aleolainers and the public, by which the latter had to pay
tivisti•this money without any compensation. The Honourable
-...Ketr.ber• for Corfe Castle' had told him, that he voted for a
unilar 11111 to this in the year 1812., He found this to be true,
• tit:; he had the more reason to be ashamed of it, now he found
estorl a monstrous abuse of the principle. The relief afforded
by this measure only, extended to the abolition of two offices in
-.lnrigiand, whose salaries amounted to 3401. in Scotland and
,irale.nd there were other offices which had fallen in, and the
.4ntire savingrwas 4,6021. 10s. Upon the 3401. saved in England
fs rut Sidrneutli had received a penlion of 3,,900.f. The -sixth
r-selutirin went to , record these facts. His object was tia place
this upon the journals, in order to let the people see the nature
their contract with the pensioners. The seventh resolution
war, declaratory. of the. opinion of the House, that if the
• oiLees hefere alluded to had become vacant without the
.ryiltence fir the Bill, and the Crown could have had the ap-
poinsnienis, it-would not have given the pension of 39001. to
itosl Viscount Sidroonth. It appeared that in 1802 Lord Sid-
raorith waiin office, and then he made his son Clerk of the
4.`ells -with a salary of 30001. Not contented with this, the
2.4 We -Lord for some supposed loss, 9khiCh he might hereafter
,sustain, 'was to receive another pension of 80001. There cer-
tainly never sass a snore roinantie-sitbation thah that in which
Ih-er:leSidniouth stood. He dittnot rileati•to go out of his way
As-, Stay any thilig disrespectfukof Lord Sidniouth, hut he appre-
heridisel that he would not rif a tnore important part in history
hi; en some ofiris predetrosoors in office. For instance, lie would
ay Lord Chatlitin ; -and that Noble Lord had but one pension
tram the King. fieolid not see,rtherefore, why Lord Sidmouth
teas to have two: Vic last resolution stated tae opinion of the
House, ',that din 'interference of a Committee of that House
=pith the &anti* of pensions was an interfereoce with, the just
yearssorative,.af.lllle Crown, ,an abuse of the power entrusted to
-.then:l)y the,Ontaltution, and a heavy grievance-to the people.
-1• U -Prooldeaftian an that his object was- to put these facts
lv..Care the Si 000fka object
ter that Bill would. be te-

mined from thz Statute Book. lie concluded by moving the
first Resolution.

, The Resolution being put from the Chair,
Mr. BA NKES said,- he was not sorry the Hon. Member had
brought the subject hefoie the House, because- it would give
him an oppOrtunity of explaining the views of the Committee
which recommended the Bill. The principle of the Bill was to
abolish everysoffice without duty. The lion. Gentleman said,
the principle was noir:One which ought to be supported; and,that
it was a departure from the principle of Air. Burke's Bill.
That great man held that it would not be injurious to the Con-
stitution, if the Government .were allowed to, tempt great ta-
lents into the public service, by the means of giving certain of-
fices as a remuneration. The Committee of which he was Chair-
man, whet' they considered the measure then before the House,
were willing to adopt the principle which allowed sinecures to
be given for public services, but they found it had been abuSed,
and they could not concur with Mr. Burke in his view of the
subject. They resolved to abolish sinecures, and they, recom-
mended the Sovereign to reward services with pensions rather
than offices. It was impossible he could support the motion. If
the Bill were repealed matters would return to what .they were
before. On the repeal of the Bill sinecures must revive. The
offices retained in Mr. Burke's Bill had been abolished; but with
respect to offices held for life, that was a species of property
which could not he set at nought. Much bad been said with
respect to a pension granted his Noble Friend, but he would
appeal to the House whether the conduct of his Noble Friend, •
while he filled the Chair of that House, was not admired. lle
was convinced no man ever received more respect and
gratitude for public services. It was but reasonable to re-,
ward the Noble Lord for a long and laborious public life.—
(Hear !)-11 e could not consent to repeal the Bill, and thereby
deprive the Crown of the-prerogative of remunerating public
men. The best prerogative of the Crown was that which made
them authors of the benefits conferred on meritorious Public
' Servants. If ever they took that prerogative out of the hands
of the Crown it would not only be unconstitutional, but occa-
sion a burden more onerous than the pensions. The Hon. Mem-
ber concluded by moving, as an amendment, that the !louse
proceed to the other Orders of the Day.
•Mr. 'H. G. BENNET supported the motion, and objected
to the Bill, on the ground that it had not answered the expecta-
tion of the public. Instead of being the means of abolishing
sinecures, it had enabled Ministers to reward their political
adherents. With respect to the Noble Lord who had been Se-
cretary for the Home Department, he was no more fit to be
Minister of the country than one of the doorkeepers. The lion.
Member who brought in the Bill had been a great reformer in
small things, because little saving had been the result of his
labours. •.•

Mr. BANKES, in explanatione said, there was a paper on
the table, which pointed out a saving produced to the public by
himself and others, which exceeded, any reform made by the
Hon. Gentleman and all his friends. It at the time proved
the falsehood of his assertion. The Committee in winch he
once sat had been the means of saving to the country more than
200,0001. • • , .
Mr. BENNET said, in reply, he paid back the full oomph
meat paid by the Hon. llenther in the term falsehood. •
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY could not avoid re-
pelling with indignatiOn some of the statements. hi hadsheard
from the Honourable •Gentlensan who introduced the Motion
and' the Honourable Member for Shrewsbury. He had -navel.
listened in an assembly of Englishmen to sentiments sa,revolts
ing to the general feeling of the- .House. The lionearralale
Member said he could-only find disgust and_corruption in the.
operation of the Bill. -Mr. Burke had-•recomtwided S•eten-
, tion of offices as the means of • rewarding Merit,. but it seemed:
those offices had been abuSed- in 'the oPplication; and the Bill
which the House wag called .upon to repeal .Was inerodticed.—
The Hon. Member had represented the Bill as accomplishing
all the work of corruption, and then had lavished all the male- •
volence of his mind against his Noble Friend the late Secretary
of State. The Noble' Marquis was not surprised the lion.
Member never would forgive his Noble Friend for his conscien-
tious service to the country: During the most difficult period
of our history that. Noble Lord protected the country and sur-
mounted the danger. He knew his Noble Friend never could
be forgiven by the Hod. Gentleman, because he 'made them
feel what' he hand of Government was able to do. His Noble
Friend had been mentioned in the most disgusting manner, and
treated worse than a door-keeper of: the, House. The Hon.
Member must have known his Noble Friend did not leave the
Chair from any wish of. his own. Ile• was induced to take a
part in the Government from a sense of public duty. Ifis
Noble Friend had been compared with Pitt and Fox, . but it
was no disparagement not to rise to the talents of those great
Statesmen ; .but his Noble Friend had given splendid proof of
his great ability. The question 'of - the Peace of Amiens,—
and the subsequent triumph of the country, might be attributed
to the wise measures of his Noble Friend. The very year af-
ter the Peace of Amiens he provided 12400,0001.• for the pub-
lic service. The excellent administration of his Noble Friend
greatly contributed to raise the triumph of the country. The
Hon. Gentleman had endeavoured to wound his Noble Friend
in a quarter which all who knew him would say was impreg-
nable. No personalinterest had ever interfered with his Noble
Friend's duty. When he left the Chair of that House, which
he filled twelve or thirteen years, nothing could induce bins to
look at his • private interest. His, Majesty was recommeaded
to grant hint a provision commensurate to-.his services, but
his Noble Friend peremptorily insisted that no provision what-
ever should be made for him while he was engaged in the ha-
zardous affairs of the country. • The King; had issued his corn.
mends for a Message to be brought, downl to that House to
reward the services of his Noble Friend as Speaker of the
House ; but his Noble Friend had desired that it might not
be done. The Honourable Member (Mr. Creevey), for pur-
poses best known to himself, had referred •to a paper on the
table which recalled the afflicting domestic circumstances in
• the family • of his Noble Friend, although, in his (the Mar,
quis's) opinion there was not the slightest necessity for such a
recurrence with any view to the Hon. Member's argument.
His Noble Friend had filled the offices of Speaker, Prime
Minister, and Secretary of State, the• latter in a period of ten
of the • most critical years in the history of the country. And
this was the individual who was to be grudged the reward of
his long services; and in respect of wheat a charge was to be
brought against the Crown for doing that which it had been
empowered to do by 'Parliament.—(l-lear, hear, hear !)—He
really felt that lie was abusing the patience of the House in en-
larging upon such a subject ; but he could not with satisfaction
to his feelings as a Gentleman, refrain from thus noticing the
speech of the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury ; a speech he be-
lieved to be tile most disgusting and disgraceful ever uttered
within the walls of an English Paeliament.—(Cheers from the
Treasury benches.)
Mr. 13ROUGHA M said, he rose to priotest against the tone
of the Noble Marquis.—(llear, hear, from the Opposition.)—
To protest against his or any Minister of the Crown daring to
use the language he had just uttered.—Loud cheers from the
Opposition, accompanied by cries of " chair," from :several
parts of the House. Here some confusion took place, but at
length] •
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to order. When,
lie Said, an lion. Member thought proper to apply the word
" dare" to his (the Marquis's) language, he was bound to Sup-
pose that the Hon.. Member must mean that he had gone be-
yond the limits of Parliamentary debate. On this supposition
he- submitted that it was the duty of the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman to take exception to his language the mo-
ment it was uttered, and to move that his words should be
taken down. lie begged to apply for the decision of the Chair
on the point.
The SPEAKER said, if the word "dare" had been used
in the sense attributed to it• by the Noble Marquis, it undoubt-
edly was highly disorderly. Ile had, however, frequently heard
the expression used in Parliamentary debate, and not objected
to. Ile a4sured the House that he had always considered its
dignity to be best consulted by forbearing to notice every ex-
pression which might escape in the heat of debate not strictly
within the rule. This had influenced his own conduct, when
he refrained from particularly remarking the warm expresaiong,
which passed between the lion. Member for Corfe Castle (Mr.
Bankes) and the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Bennet.)
Mr. BROUGHAM resumed.—He .was quite satisfied that
everybody-who heard him, and was not, like the Noble Mar-
, quis, carried away by the heat of the debate, must have under-
: stood him in the way that it appeared he was understood by
the Chair.- He had heard the expression• in question applied,
Ire thought, hundreds of times. He had often applied it him-
self, and it had never before been taken up. Ile repeated his
protest against any Minister of the Crown' presuming (for he
would say presuming, us it seemed he was to be driven
from the phrase) to speak as he had done of one of the
Representatives of the people ih that House. Such lan,
guage as that of the Noble Marquis no Minister had ever
ventured, chosen, or pleased (for the critical ear of the'
Noble Marquis might take whichever of the verbs it thought
good) to utter in that House. Disgusting !—(Cheers from
the Treasury Benchea.)—Disgraceful !—(Loud cheers from the
Treasury Benches).—lle perfectly well understood those cheers.
There might be those.in the House whO thought the speech of
► his Honourable, Friend disgusring and 'disgraceful; but he
(Mr. B.) was not one of them. It was however , one thing
to think so, and another thing to say so ; and 'that too he re-
peated in the language of the Noble Marquis. lie had to apo-
logize for his own warmth ; but he could not resist it when he
heard such epithets opposed to the manly sentiments of his
Hon. Friend, whose honest heart and-..cern inflexibility of prin-
ciples he had so long known and admired. With respect to the
question before the House, he had but a word or two to offer.
Of Lord Sidniouth he should not speak harshly, because • he
1 was ; nor should he make comparisons, because he al-
ways understood that they were odious. • Ile must say how-
-1 ever that nothing could be More absurd or ludicrous than the
-appointment osloved Sidraouth .to be Minister at the time when

he was actually appointed. True be.made.the Peace of Amiens ;
but he soon broke it, and occasioned miseries which were now
felt, and, would be felt when they were all forgotten. But the
Noble Marquis had avoided the place where the shoe pinched;
for the complaint was,Thot the Pension to Lord 'Sidmouth, but
the fact that Pension anti Office were retained together. He
denied that his Ilon. Friend bad alluded to Lord Sidmouth's
Son, for the purpose of hurting the feelings of the father. His
Hon. Friend was incapable of it. He (Mr. B.) should support
the motion.

The'Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that his being a
Minister of the Crown did- not precincte him delivering his opi-
nian'as'a Member of that'House. - He had applied the terms
" disgusting" and 44. disgraceful" (in a Parliamentary sense)
to the way in which the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury had
spoken of his Noble. Friend, in comparing him to the door-
keepers of the HouSe. Upon reflection, he was not disposed to
think that he had at all misapplied the terms
Mr. C. BATE I URST said, that Lord Sidmouth had offered
the place of Clerk of the Polls to several distinguished indivi-
duals before he offered it to his son.
Mr. CREEVEY shortly replied,
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the Amendment , - 143
For the Original lotion - - 42
Majority - - - .-101

The House then proceeded to the other Orders of the Day, in
course of which .3Ir..CRE EVE r moved his Resolutions be-
:ween each Order, but they were negatived without a division.
adjourned at HALF-PAST Two this morning.