The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-13 00:00:00

EAST INDIA RUM

Th, Order of the Day being read for the further con-
tiO.t ;.-iton of the Report of the above Bill.
. HAWE S presented a petition from landowners, ma-
muts.:turers cf sugar, and others, of British India, complain-
ing, that the Bill hal been so altered that it would fail'im
effecting the objects it was intended to carry out, and
prr.ying that it should not be so clogged with restrictions
ate it at present was.
Mr. LABOUCHERE moved that the Report be now
eceived.

r. GOULBURN suggeoted that as there were seve-
xel verbal amendments to be made it would be much bet-
ter to re-commit the Bill. He did not mean it for the
purpose of dely, but the amendments would be easier
understood.
Lord J. RUSSELL had no objection, and if no im-
portant alterations were made, probably there would be
1130 objection to the Report being brought up that night.
The House then went into Committee.
On clause 1 being read,
Mr. GOULBURN thought it would be;neeessary to
teaks some alteration in the wording of the clause in
order to render it effective. It repealed all the existing
Antics on rum, and substituted a duty of 9s. 4d.,
'which was to be paid under certain conditions; but it ap-
peered to him that where these conditions were not com-
plied with no provision wbateaer was made by the Bill.
Mr. LABOUCHERE contended that the wording of
the clause was sufficiently explicit.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN thought the Bill, as it
Mod, would meet all difficulties, without any alteration
Icing required.
Atter a few words from Mr. HOGG,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
Ile quite approved of the propriety of altering the words,
5S any doubt existed respecting them.
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 2 being proposed,
Mr. HAWES said he rose to propose an amendment.
The former Bill did not require the Queen in Council to
approve the regulations, and the effect of the alteration
would be to bring about a delay, of which he complained.
alat delay was until the Queen in Council here could ap-
prove cf regulations that were made in India. Again,
the eum to oe imported was the produce of sugar. From
whatever the sugar was obtained, when it was in a state
sof sugar, it would produce rum, and that rum would come
'into this country at the lower rate of duty. Now an attempt
lad been made to make a distinction between sugar pro-
educed from the sugar cane, and sugar produced from any
thing else. In the West Indies it was not produced from
tanything but the sugar-cane, but in the East Indies it was
:produced from two things, the sugar cane and the date,
,sand it would be imposiblo to decide from which the sugar
-was made. If no rum, the product of any other sugar
ei.en that of the cane, were to be admitted under this Bill,
at seould shut out a great quantity of the rum of the East
iee.es. It would throw great difficulty in the way of the
manufacture of rum, and also of sugar, in the East.—
( 'leer, hear.) In the first Bi 1 introduced on this subject
oe his Right Hon. Friend, there was no such distinct:on
me .i this; and he believed that the distinctive words were
s,7,e:educed at the suggestion of West India merchants,
-seithoet giving to those who were connected with the
Yaat Indies an opportunity of pointing out the unfair
&Net which would be thereby produced upon their late-
eeets. He would move his amendments, and take the sense
sof the House upon them ; and if they were rejected he
could, at another stage, take the sense of the House upon
whole Bill. He concluded by meting—That, in the
clause, all the words after the word "operation," in
she second line, down to the word "nor," in the seventh
;tine, be omitted :—After the words " sugar-cane," in the
eleventh line, to insert these words, " all other substances
'rem ediich sugar is made, and allowed to be imported,
tsdier the Act of 6 and 7 Will. 4, c. 26."
Aitcr a few words from Mr. GOULBURN,
Is. LABOUCHERE observed, that ha had no wish
_he question should not be fairly discussed ; and it
s for that purpose he had allowed of the delay in pro.
!edicg with the measure. His Hon. Friend the Mem-
o: for Lambeth seemed to labour under an erroneous
eeeeseion with regard to the power of the Governor-
-4e eel: of India, in making out certain rules and regula-
his tr. That provision would not confer on the Governor-
Gsnera: a-.y undue authority, as it was merely proposed by
it teat he should construct such regulations an he might
think adaiiable, subject afterwards to the approval of
rarliamert The real demand made by the East Indiana
vas, that t'ae produce of the sugar-cane, whether rum or
sugar, should be admitted on equal terms to the English
arket. The Bill was brought in as a sugar Bill and as
at rum Bill, but tit tas a spirit B:11, It was true, sugar
and spirit might 're made ferns beet-root, or potato, or
ie ac, but no one ever called tact spirit rum. He could
7.0 t admit spirit from date, for if he did he did not see
where he was to draw the line. The object cf the Bill
-wee net to admit all East India spirit, but merely to admit
:run!, the produce of the sugar-cane ; and he should be
Wc.viLing to depart from that principle.
Mr. HOGG had called the attention of the Right Hon.
Gentleman to the fact that the Bill would have the effect
of ex eluding rum, the produce of the date. He contended
everything was runs that was made from the refuse of
isssg r. The manufacturer of sugar in the East Indies
es,ii'd not tell whether the goor brought to his ma-
zrufmtory vat tie produce of the date or the cane,
so ;hat it was utterly impossible that any conscienti rus
mass could make the declaration required. The Hon.
Gentleman must stand upon the broad principle that sugar
toot was geed and wholeneme must be admitted. They
ea not limit thsreselver to the produce of the sugar
wane, I censure, in the W'eat Indies, they might make their
sqsgar from what they pleaseJ, and maple sugar might he
iwpoitsel from Canada. Rum was riot made from the raw
an.; ,crla!, but from the refuse of sugar. If the rum from
India Was not good, people would not buy it, and that was
their best security.—( Hear, hear.) The introduction of
the manufacture cf sugar from the date Was very recent,
nail he trusted the House would not check the ingenuity
of the Indian manufacturer.
Mr. GLADSTONE thought that some delay:ought
to take place, as the West Indians had been led to expect
thet no change would take place for some time ;
t.p.r,-_,fcre, he must vote against the first motion.
'Viltn regard to the second motion, be could not
iereeine upon what ground it was sought to make
eatinction between cane and date sugar. For
Leta past the Customs had been in the habit
vi admitting spirit the produce of the date, as rum.
lie had known rum of the very first quality brought to
alga country which had been made from the date. The
Eight lion. Geet'eman had announced an alteration of
Feat importance, and that was with respect to the dis-
criminatirg duties on rum in Canada. He thought he
was right la that alteration. Mier the statement of his
Hon. Friend he could not conceive it possible for the
liiesist Hors. Gentleman to hesitate as to the course he
cunt to pursue. If the Right Hon. Gentleman suc-
ceecied in carrying bin proposition through the Committee
it was impossible anything so inconsistent could finally
form .part of the permanent commercial system of the
eo..irrtry.
Mr. LABOUCHERE raid if the Committee would
,?t him to consider this question he would on the next
s,:eo of the Bill sta e the course he WAS prepared to take.
to the first amendment of his Hen. Friend he must's:ye
It cis most decided opposition.
Mr. WARBURTON hoped his Hon. Friend would
witln;raw his first amendment.
Sir A. GRANT was of opinion that the advantage of
equalizing the duties on East and West India rum had
been very much exaggerated. He hoped the Right Hon.
Gentleman would conduct the investigation he had rro-
as:.sed with perfect fairness.
Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL regretted that the present
A Bill had no single provision bearing upon human slavery in
' ij-; the East Ind'

that

Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE thought the question that
bad been raised with respect to slavery in the East Indies
by the Hon. Gentleman, was of far too great importance
to be introduced iato the clause of a Rum Bill,
Mr. HAWES had no ohjecti:h to withdraw l,is first
amendment.
The first amendment Vies then withdrawn.
Mr. GO ULBURN would suggest to the Right Hun.
Gentleman the propriety of stating his views, in order

that fair opportunity might be afforded of considering the
provisions of the Bill.
Mr. L ABO UC HE RE said be had no objection to re-
port the Bill on Monday, in order to give ample opportu-
nityfor consideration. _ .

r. GOULBURii said that by, the third clause of the
Act it was provided that it should not be lawful to import
any foreign Lugar. cr any sugar the growth of any British
possession, int) which foreign sugar could be legally im-
porter?. Ceylon was close to the Indian coast. If they
allowed the rum as spirit of Ceylon to be brought into
mad exported thence to England, in any sugar
grown in Ceylon exported into India, and made into rum
to be exported to England, they would violate their own
principles. Rum should be put precisely upon the same
footing as sugar.
Mr. HOGG said that under the third clause rum could
not be imported into aly country, hut that from which the
importation of foreign sugar was prohibited.
Mr. UOULBUKN said the alteration which he pro-
posed to make h the third clause was this—that instead
of " rum and foreign rum shrub," it should read, " that
rum and rum-shrub, the produce of any foreign country,
or any British possession into which foreign sugar can be
legally imported."
Mr. L ABO UC HE RE had no objection to the altera-
tion.

The amendment was then agreed to.
Mr. GOULBURN then proposed to insert, instead of
the words " Until the Governor-General in Council shall
have passed an Act contzieing those regulations," the
words, " And adequate regulations have been made by
law in such British possessions." He had before sawed
his views upon this point. His object was to give to the
parties who bad grievances the power of obtaining speedy
redress.
Mr. LABOUCHERE objected to the alteration be-
cause of the delay which it would rause, and because it
was impossible to treat a great empire like India as a
srnall colony. There was in India a very excellent revenue
establishment, and having la'd down the principle, they
might safely leave the details to the Government of India.
Mr. HAWES said the excise regulations of India
were remarkably stringent—quite as stringent as those of
oar own country.
Mr. GOULBURN said be objected to the clause,
because, it it passed, there would be no power of obtaining
redress except tram the Governor-General in Council.
They were giving certain advantages to India, and they
had a ri4hr, to impose an efficient control.
Sr J. C. HOBHOUSE observed that if any injury
were unre3ressed a final appeal could at any time be made
to the British Parliament, who could revise the proceed-
ings of the Indian Government and correct any error that
might have occurred. Of late years great fiscal changes
had been left to be made by the Governer-General in
Council. They had been well done, and the House might
safely !cave all the powers of the Bill to be exercised by
bins. He congratulated the House upon an approach to
do even tardy justice to India.—(Cries of " Divide.")
Mr. LABOUCHERE said a few words, but i❑ canae-
quence of the confusion caused by the influx of Members
consequent on the ringing of the division bell, he was not
heard in the gallery.
Mr. HOGG did not think that any one would have di.
vided the House on such a proposition; but should any one
do so, he bad no fear for the result. Why were the au-
thorities and population of the Ea't Indies to be so dis-
trusted? Were they not as honest as those of the West
Indies? What could the Privy Council know of the ex-
cise regulations? were they to be raised into a tribunal of
appeal upon such a question ?
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but
Mr. GOULBURN withdrew his amendment, and the
clause was agreed to.
The remaining clauses were then agreed to ; and the
Chairman reported ; the Bill
.to be further considered on
Monday next.
COUNTY COURTS' BILL.

Mr. F. MAULE moved the second reading of the
County Courts' Bill.
Sir F. POLLOCK did not rise for the purpose of op-
posing the Bill, but, at the same time, he thought it was
due to the Government and to the House to state that he
entertained considerable objection to many of the clauses,
and some of them the principal ones. It was necessary,
he had almost said, for the honour of Parliament, that a
Bill on this subject should be passed. It was so long ago
as 1823, when Lord Althorp proposed a Bill, which was
read a first time. It was introduced in the next year, and
passed, but was thrown out by the Lords, because of
the want of compensation clauses. It was intro-
duced the following year, but died in a Committee.
But in 1827 the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth
brought ,in a Bill founded upon the same principle as
Lord Althorp's, which was read a first time only. Next
year it was read a first and second time, but was delayed
in consequence of the appointment of a Committee ; it was
not further proceeded with. In 1830 it was introduced
by Mr. Brougham, but not passed. In 1830 and 1831
they were all too busy with the Reform Bill to care much
about it, and in 1832 it was superseded by the Com-
mission of which he had the honour to be a Member.
In 1832 a Bill was introduced into the House of Lords,
but it was not successful ; in 1834 he believed nothing was
done, and in 1835, when he (Sir F. Pollock) was on the
opposite side of the House, he stated, in answer to
a question from his Hon. and Learned Friend the Attor-
ney-General, that it was his intention to bring in a Bill to
facilitate the recovery of small debts. In consequence of
the appropriation clause having been carried in that
Session his Hon. and Learned Friend became At-
torney-General, but he seemed to have quite for-
gotten the question he had put to biro (Sir Frederick
Pollock) in the early part of the Session, for he
brought in no measure on the subject. In 1838 another
similar measure was brought forward, but was ultimately
withdrawn. All those various Bills concurred in certain
points, and it might be taken as the concurrent opinion of
various Parliaments and Governments, that something was
necessary to be done upon the subject. They concurred
ill the extension of the iurisditicn of the County or Local
Courts—in the reduction oft expense, and in giving a
summary jurisdiction. But they differed a good deal in
other details; and, first, with regard to the manner in
which the Judge should be appointed. Now, under the
present Bill, a power was placed in the hands of the Go-
vernment to create not less than fifty officers, at an
salary cf 1,5001. a year each, and that he thought a most
monstrous and uncalled for exercise of Government pa-
tronage.—( Hear, hear.) The Bill of his Right Hon.
Friend, on the contrary, left the Judges of the County
Courts as they at present existed, but merely gave them
more extensive jurisdiction. It appeared to him that it
was much better to improve the existing institution than
to introduce an entirely new principle. In all the Bills
that had been introduced into that House it was provided
that the Judges should be barristers of a certain standing.
The Bill of 1839 provided that the barrister should
be of seven years' standing. but after the Bill
came out of the Select Committee to which it had been
referred, a barrister of any standing might be
appointed the Judge, and in like manner any attorney of
any of the Superior Courts might be selected. These pro-
visions were embodied in the present Bill, and they ap-
peared to him very objectionable. There was another
clause connected with the examination of the parties to a
suit, which he should ray required amendment. There
was no ()ejection in cases where there were only small
sum!, cf money in dispute to examine the plaintiff and de-
fendant, but the House would recollect that the present Bill
exter!ed the jurisdiction of these Courts to cases of slan-
der, libel, seduction, and criminal conversation, and in
such cases it would be most injudicious and objec-
tionable to have the parties called forward and put
into the witness box to undergo the cross-examination cf
the opposite party.—( Hear, hear.) At present he ex-
press, d no opinion one way or the other, but he enter-
tained considerable doubt whether the clause with refer-
ei,ce to cases of seduction would be found to work well.
There was also another detail of the me rsure which ap-
peared to him of rather questionable utility, namely, the
power of imprisoning the person, which they all knew was
liable to great abuse. Now there was no use in the suit
unless the money was recovered, and he confessed lie was
decidedly opposed to the principle of imprisoning a party
until the debt was paid.—(Hear, hear.) Ho objected
also to their extending these Courts to places where they
already had local Courts of a concurrent jurisdiction, and
he was satisfied the parties in these towns and districts
would by no means thank them for interfering with the
established and recognised Courts in their localities.
He would now draw the attention of the House to another
Zhuse, by which the Lord Chancellor would be enabled
to appoint 25 more Judges. That power was a most
dangerous one, and in that respect the present Bill was, he
coneeived,a most dangerous and unconstitutional one. The
object of the Bill seemed to be to give to the Crown the
power of creating the patronage which it was to exercise.
With the exception of the power that was given to the
Poor-law Commissioners of making edicts which should
have the force of an Act of Parliament, he did not know
of a more unconstitusional Bill than the present, which
would give to the Crown the power of creating from time
tthootuigmhet
at. places
m
iwnihsiteehrs wwcerre tcovidLeentulysedindaus
cetdhetoCbroriwngn
in this Bill at the present time with a view to its
effects at a general election which was likely soon to
occur, for a dissolution of Parliament was im-
minent. The distribution of these fifty places, at
1,5001. a year, gave, ho conceived, more than double
the patronage of the bestowal of situations in all
the regiments of cavalry and infantry in the army. He
would net consent to any measure of this sort, which
would undoubtedly cast suspicion on the motives of the
N E RAGLe
ns
tal id n tahnat
opposite the c o uwr saes
Government.
adopted
Tbe)
ATTORNEY-GENERAL
say-
ing that he entirely
RI-/NonE. lantGl LearnedE
d to the principle of the Bill,
a mutt extraordinary ore. lie ( Sir F. Pollock) began by say-
f this sort, and then be sod-
brought forward a measure c
and reproached Ministers with not having long :ince
denly turned round and did all is his power to show that
the motives which actuated the Government in bringing
of the Crown.
forward that Bill were improper ones, not having in view the
public good but the extension of the patronage
With regard to the charge of delay, he (the
Ge-
neral) must appeal
to that House and the country Attorney-
whether,
institu-
since the year 1835, the Members of the Government had
not exerted themselves to improve the law and the
tions of the country. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman,
then instanced the Bill with respect to the execution of
will, and several other excellent measures passed since
that period. The Bill now before the House was intro-
duced in the year 1839. It was then referred to a Select
Committee of Members, who were taken from both sides
of the House. That Committee devoted much time to the
consideration of the several clauses of the Bill, which were,
as he was informed, unanimously adopted, with the excep-
tion cf the clause which referred to the manner in which
tile Judges should he appointed. That clause was modi-
fied, are! the Bill was now introduced in its amended state,
such as it came from the Committee. A more gratuitous
and unfounded charge was never trade than that which
was brought against the Government by the Honourable
arid Learned Member opposite, in attempting to ire-
piton the motives which urged thorn to bring in this
Bill. It seemed to him, at that stage, to be unuecessary
to cuter into the details of the Bill ; but, with respect to
the butter of imprisonment,the clause was inserted out of
respect to the Committee, otherwise be
(the Attorney-
General) was disposed to object to it. He thought the

House and the public would be of opinion that it was a '
,measure calculated to promote the administration of jus-
tice, and to supply a defect that bad long been felt. He
believed that the insinuations which had been thrown out
by his Learned Friend would be considered as unfounded,
except by those of his own party.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) He (the Attorney- General) was sorry
to hear them in the speech of his Learned Friend,
and he thought if he (Sir F. Pollock) wished to make an
attack upon the Government be might have found a more
fitting opportunity.—( Hear, hear.) He thought his
Learned Friend had little displayed his good taste in se-
leming this Bill as the ground of a party attack. It was
a Bill which embodied all the main principles of the Bill
of the Right Hon. Member for Tamwortb, and which had
been approved of by all those who had for years past
sought to improve our laws. He hoped, therefore, it
would go into Committee, when, if there was any objec-
tion to a particular clause it could be iscussed, and be
believed that if it was carried, as he did not doubt it would
be, it would be considered as a boon to the country.
Sir E. SUDDEN said a Law Bill was always con-
sidered a party question, and therefore he was surprised
at the surprise expressed by the Learned Attorney-Ge-
neral at what had falleu from his Learned Friend. His
Learned Friend (Sir F. Pollock) had said nothing of a
party character.—(Laughter.) His Learned Friend had
net made charges against the Government, but said he
feared the charges he mentioned would be brought against
against them by people out cf doors.—(Laughter.) His
Hon. and Learned Friend (the Attorney- Ger,e,-al) had a
courage in speakieg of the legislative efforts of the
Government to which he (Sir E. Sugden) could not pre-
tend. lie would proceed to discuss this measure, and to
show how it would operate, and the abuses to which it
was liable ; but he would first advert to another measure
before the House, the Administration of Justice Bill.
He thought the House ought to know what the Government
intended to do with this measure before they were called
upon to discuss the one then before them. Her Majesty's
Government had also issued a commission to inquire into
banks uptcy and insolvency, and the Commissioners, with
one exception, made a report. The other Commissioners
also made a report, and it was upon the report of that
single Commissioner that the Government measure was
founded. The majority of the Commissioners had re-
commended the abolition of arrest for debt under all cir-
cumstances. But in this Bill, the power of imprisonment
was given in an indefinite maniac-. The Bill was one in
favour of the middle classes and tradesmen, against the
humblest part of the working classes. He was very much
disposed to think that in a Small Debts Court, there should
only be a means of recovery against the goods without any
power over the person of the debtor. Every body was agreed
that there should be some general Bill for establishing
Courts for the recovery of small debts. In order to Judge
of the merits of the Bill now before the House, the pre-
visions of the other Bill upon a part of the same subject
ought to be before the House. He thought that Gentlemen
upon his side had a right to complain of the course which
Ministers had pursued in respect to the separate advance-
ment of ti a two Bills. This Bill did not propose to abo-
lish the Courts of Baron and the Leet Courts, and he did
not see why it proposed to abolish the Courts of Request.
He did not see why this measure was to be forced upon
districts which were already satisfied with the new laws
which had so recently been passed for them. There
was oe his side of the House every disposition to give
every facility to the establishment of Small Debts
Courts ; but they objected to this measure as having none
of the good principles which the other measures, intended
to be superseded by actually contained. The House of
Lords had rejected a Bill of much the same nature as the
present, which was introduced by Lord Brougham. —( A
laugh.) He asked, did Hon. Members opposite laugh at
the Bill of their own Lord Chancellor, ?—( Hear, bear,
and a laugh.) That Bill contained certainly one
phantasy—one folly_( A laugh)—the project of a Court
of Reconcilement.—( Hear, and a laugh.) That was a
folly, but the Bill, on the whole, was less foolish than this
Bill. Let the House look for a moment at what the Go-
vernment now required. They wanted two additional
Equity Judges, with a salary of 5,000/. a-year each, be-
sides the payment of secretaries, clerks, and other officers.
They bad also a Bill before the House for the establish-
ment of twenty-four new Judges of Appeal, to be ap-
pointed by the Speaker, if not by the Government itself ;
and now they came and asked for the appointment of
fifty-four Judges more. The Commissioners whom they
had themselves entrusted with the duty of reporting on the
subject, had stated that it would be difficult to find twenty-
three lawyers of eminence at the bar to fill the office of
Judges. The object of the Government would seem to
have been to find two Judges of great eminence, and
twenty-nine Judges of inferior, but high character, while
they would have fifty of less consideration, so that they
would, in reality, require in all seventy-six Judges.—
Teat was a bold experiment, a wholesale system of
legislation on the subject. The expenses wltich would
attend the proposed system would, he should venture to
say, amount to between 300,0001. and 400,0001. a year.—
( Hear, hear.) No doubt this was a time at which it was
supposed such an increased expense could be incurred ;
this must have been, in the eyes of Government, a season
of prosperity, when we were in no danger from foreign
aggression, and when all was quiet at home.—( Hear,
Leer.) He did not wish to speak harshly of the Govern-
ment, but he remembered that when they had accepted
office, they declared their determination of adopting the
no-patronage principle. How painful it must be to
them to haw; forced on them, by the necessity of the
times, no doubt, a degree of patronage of which the
most rapacious Government ;had never dreamt.—(Hear.)
The Bill required no standing, no degree of eminence on
the part of those who were to act as Judges under it. It
also contained many injurious details. The attorney, for
instance, who might appear for a party was not allowed to
receive more than Roe for his remuneration on the reco-
very of a sum under 201. Such a remuneration was insuf-
ficient, and that system would only tend to induce attor-
neys to make up in the number of cases, by creating litiga-
tion, for the smallness of the reward allotted to them. In
cue WWI, inajurity or cases at present the opinion ol counsel
given decided the case without its coming into Court at
all, because the law was certain ; but by this Bill there
would be fifty different Courts without any appeal to bring
about uniformity in their decisions, and however good the
Courts might be at their commencement this would
infallibly make them bad in the progress of time.—
( Hear.) Was the House aware of the present mode of
proceeding in the Courts of Requests. It was impossible
that any lawyer could address himself to administer the
law in Courts of that sort, and therefore they ought to be
left as they were at present. These were not mere Small
Debts Courts alone, but they were to have jurisdiction in
cases of slander, libel, false imprisonment, seduction, cri-
minal conversation—cases the most important as involving
questions of law and charactea, and these were to be de-
cided in Courts where attorneys and not counsel were to
attend. Now, to keep a Judge to his duty, it was neces-
sary he should have an intelligent bar to watch his
conduct, and a Court of Appeal over him. These Courts
would to a vast extent encourage actions among the lower
orders which they would never have thought of bring-
ing but for the Bill, and it would create bound-
less confusion and litigation throughout the country.
The second Bill contained powers to a great extent.
Those Commissioners and Judges who in the first Bill
were merely subordinates, had in the second Bill cast upon
them the most important duties. They were made County
Commissioners of Bankruptcy, and a power was given to
the Lord Chancellor to enable them to transact any bust-
Less which the Court of Review now performed ; in fact,
there was no question of law that they might not be called
upon to decide, however important it might be. A more
important jurisdiction could not be given to the highest
Judges of the land, than was going to be given to these
Judges, these Pic Poudre Courts. Besides that these
Judges were to be Comniissioners cf Lunacy. and, inde-
pendent of that, they were to execute all inquiries directed
by the Lord Chancellor. The resu't was, that duties were
thrown upon them which they rover could fulfil. A more
ill considered measure than the present he had never seen,
and he believed it to be a measure that would be repro-
bated from one end of the country to the other. In fact it
was impossible the thing could work. He had much mere
to say upon the Bill, but considering the lateness of the
hour he would not trouble the House further than to say he
would give all the provisions of the Bill his most strenuous
opposition.
Mr. F. M AUL E said be would not at that late hour
enter into any lengthened discussion upon the subject of
the Bill then before the House, more especially as the
Hon. and Learned Gentlemen 'on the other side of the
House had declared their approbation of its princip!e, but
whie they did so they endeavoured, as far as was
in their power, to overthrow that principle, and
they had giten their approbation more from a foaling
that they dared not refuse the principle than from any
love they bore to that measure. Ti,e Right Hon. and
Learned Member seemed to treat with ridicule and de-
rision the object of the Bill, namely, to bring home to
the door of the poor man justice.—(Hear, hear.) The
Right Honourable Gentleman bad touched upon many
matters which he was not competent to discuss, but
several remarks bad fallen from him, to which be felt
bound to say something. In talking of the qualification
of the Judges, the Honourable Gentleman had
drawn the worst possible picture of what might be
the operation of tie Bill. lie had supposed the ma-
chinery to be selected of the worst materials, and had
complained of the period of practice required in
order to become a Judge. When this Bill was first intro-
duced the limit fixed was seven years. It went into COM-
mittro up stairs and came back in the precise form in
which it then came before the House. Members of both
sides of the House were members of that Committee. It
was in entire consonance with the opinion of the Com-
mittee.s
oaafden Jnndi)ui,
atd ttt h Judg
es
nthat
adw ta
vast The Hon. Gentleman had said that tho number
eiat
administrationwbaosldsnp.ropßosnittiotnh.e
evilslle (t
oM rb. F
remediede . 3I aul c )
mass
of
grievances
dleere as vast as that proposition was bold. No owe could
iev
of
aneetshee lawxisted
tb under
roug throughout
pre-
sentthe administration. The object of the Bill was to assimilate
whole kingdom. For that purpose,
must be made ; and those who proposed a '"rYgreat change
be prepared to be attacked for making
that change must
exten-
sive, and, as the Hon. Gentleman hagd termedalargeard
abldchange. He (Mr. F. Maule) was quite ready it,
to take his
share of the blame. There had been no attempt to con-
ceal the numbers proposed—it was stated is
page
in the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The H the very first
on. Gentleman
said that they had been afraid to state at once, and in one
Bill, the whole number of Judges which they contem-
plated. Tne reason why he had brought in two Bills
was this. He was quite aware that if the se-
cond Bill were mixed up with the first, it would
have been
objected tribt tue matters were perfectly
different, and that endeavours would have been made
by objections to the second, to throw out the first of his
Bills. He had thought it beat to avoid risking such a re-
13P1 he
suit. Now, by the first proposed to establish
England, Local Courts throughout to the number of 25.
The Hon. Member had stated that the expense attendant
upon them would be enorrnouF. He ( Mr. F. Maule)
again for discussion,
prove when the question came
prove to the Howe that instead cf bringing a vast expen-
diturethe country, the Bill would actually. effect a
Uf on
both with reference
considerable saving—( Hear, hear)—
and
lunacy. the country courts, and to bankruptcy, insolvency,
of the Honourable
lunacy. As to the complaint

Member that the House had been taken by sur-
prise, he begged to remind him that the Report
of the Committee was laid upon the table of the
House in the July of last Session ; and the Bill was in-
troduced on the recommendation contained in that Re-
port: The Hon. Member had, in speaking of the Small
Debts Bills which had been passed within the last two cr
three Sessions, referred to the very difficult question of
compensation to the present holders of office. He (Mr.
F. Maule) believed that that was in fact the rock upon
which these Bills mere made to split.—( Hear, hear.)
Every year, when a fresh measure was proposed, it was
stopped by claims for compensation ; and the Right
Honourable Gentleman by the course which be was
pursuing did in fact encourage such claims.—( Hear.)
He would not follow the Right Hon. Gentleman through
the whole of his observations, and it would not be fair to
the House to do so, when be was told that the principle of
the Bill was not opposed. He was not so wedded to any of
the clauses of the Bill as to insist on the retention of arty
in particular ; but when they came to discuss the measure
in Committee, he trusted they would do so without any
party feeling whateve-.=( Hear.) Let them place the
patronage in whatever hands they might, he still trusted
the measure would he carried through with the consent of
all parties; and he would not hesitate to give way and
make any amendments which were likely to meet the views
of the House. He trusted there would be no objection
now to read the Bill a second time.
After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORP,
Mr. HAWES thought the great principle they should
ke-p in v'ew was that they were creating a number of
Local Courts, in which justice would be cheaply and
speedily administered. He regretted to find that the Hon.
and Learned Gentlemen opposite bad confined them-
selves to finding fault is ith the details of the Bill, although
they dared not attack its principle. They had complained
of the enormous amount of the patronage which the Go-
vernment was assuming to itself, but they could not forget
that there were at present 700 Commissioners scattered all
over the country, and that there acre 140 Courts of vari-
ous scrts for the recovery of small debts, and if he mistook
not there was not a great deal of reliance placed upon the
decisions of the majority of these Courts. If the Govern-
ment was not to appoint the Judges in these Courts, he
wished to know in whose hands the appointment was to be
placed? Did the opposite party wish to delay the passing
of the measure till themselves came into power that they
might obtain the patronage which they objected to see
exercised by the present Ministers?—(Hear, hear.)
Was it, he would ask, a small benefit to the pubic to
have a cheap mode of recovering debts? The Right Hon.
Gentleman had said that the Bid was a Bill for the middle
classes, and not for the poor man. Now he ( Mr. Hawes)
was at a loss to know how it could be said that it would
not have the effect of bringing home justice to the door of
the poor man. Then the Hon. Gentleman had stated
that in the recommendation of the Commissioners
there was no appeal, that was not the case, because an ap-
peal was recommended by the Commissioners to the Lord
Chancellor. He hoped if the struggle upon the Bill was
to be carried on by legal gentlemen, that there were those
in that House whe were connected with commerce who
would stand up and defend the measure. He hoped also
that they would not be led away or frightened by the de-
nunciations of lawyers.
Mr. SHAW considered the great defect of the Bill to
be the want of any provision to accure uniformity and cer-
tainty of decision.
Mr. ENNIS VIVIAN wished to know how far the
Bill would interfere with the Stannaries Court, which was
both a court of law and a court of equity.
Mr. FOX MA ULE replied that the Bill would not
interfere with the jurisdiction of that Court at all.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed, pro forma, on Friday next.
The Bankruptcy, Insolvency, and Lunacy Bills were
read a second time and ordered to be committed on Friday.
The Ordnance Survey Bill was read a second time,
and ordered to be committed.

Tne House then went into Committee on the Lease and
Release Bill, which was ordered to be read a third time on
Monday.
The Mutiny Bill and the Marine Mutiny Bill passed
through Committee, and the Reports were ordered to be
received on Monday.
The House then Adjourned at a Quarter past One
o'Clock.

.4L