The Sun.
London, England, 1823-06-18 00:00:00

Court of Exchequer in Ireland, and also that two reports of the
Commissioners oflnquiry into the Coons ofJustice in 'lreland
be referred to the Committee.
The House having gone into the Committee,
Mr. S. RICE said, that in presenting himself to the House,
he felt how inadequate he was to the important task which he
had felt it his duty to undertake, but having in the discharge of
that duty undertalcen it, he was aware he had no claim to any
other indulgence than a patient attention to the statement which
he should submit. There were, however, considerations con.
netted with this subject, which made it of importance. The first
was—and to that he should implore the most serious attention
of Hop. Alernbers—that this was a personal question, involving
the character of a high judicial officer in Ireland, and from those
who might defend that character, and above all from those who
might feel disposed to affirm his (Mr. Rice's) resolu:
tions, their duty to the House and the country, and to
the high officer. in question, required the' most minute
attention to the facts of the case. There were besides these,
other grounds on which the question recommended itself to
the attention of the House ; for if ever any subject more par-
ticularly than another demanded the attention of Parliament,
it was that which concerned the administration of justice in
the country.—(llear !) —lt was found that in cases of that
nature in this country, the best attention of Members was given ;
but in cases relating to the administration of justice in Ireland,
the demands on their attention were augmented for, assum-
ing the case, that delinquency, great or small, had found its
way to the seat of justice in this country, that would not coun-
teract the due reverence for the law, or the feeling of respect
for those who administered it. But in Ireland, where Unfortu-
nately so many circumstances had concurred for a long series
of years, tending to create a contrary spirit, there was great
danger in suffering any matter affecting the administration of
justice to pass without the most strict investigation. If the
House should find, that in the reports before them there were
any matters tending to diminish the respect for the laws, and
for those who administered them, it was the duty of that House
to inquire into the case, and, if the facts admitted it,, to clear
the party charged, and restore him unsullied to the discharge
of his functions. If, on the other hand, it should be found that
the reports were well founded, he trusted that nothing would
prevent the House from doing justice to the country. It had
been stated that this question was now a mere speculative clues-
tion ; and that as the fees had been abolished, it was no longer
worth contemplating in a practical point of view. He wished
to God that such were the case; but if he had not thought that
this question bore upon the present and upon the future condi.
tion of Ireland, no consideration of the past would have induced
him to have brought it forward. In performing the task which
he had taken upon himself, he would abstain as much as he
could from wounding the feelings of any individual ; for he
could assure the House that he was not actuated by any en.
mity or ill will to the party whose conduct was implicated
by his resolutions. If lie had been actuated by any such mo.
tives, he would have allowed the reports to have remained un-
contradicted on the table, and would not have given to the
Chief Baton any opportunity of exonerating hiniself from the
charges which they brought against him. Those charges
were confined within a narrow compass, and embodied so
many general principles, that though they related to the judi-
cial conduct of a great public funcuonary, they were quite in,
telligible to any individual of ordinary talent, even though he
did not belong to the profession of the law. The Hon. Mem-
ber then proceeded to contend that it was the duty of Parlia-
ment to watch over the conduct of the Judges, and to take
care that they did not exact any fees to which hey were not
fairly anti lawfully entitled. Having stated the opinion of
Lord Bacon upon this point, he informed the House, that in a
commission which was Issued in the reign of Charles 11. to
prevent the improper exaction of fees in court of justice, it
was well set forth that the taking of improper fees was " a
dishonour to the King's justice, and an increase of charge to
the suitors in his courts." In the reign of George 1., when
it was necessary to provide a similar remedy for a similar
abuse, the preamble of the Act of Parliament which was
passed for that purpose contained these words—" Whereas
divers improper fees hare been taken in several of his Ma-
Ujesty's Courts, to the great oppression of his Majesty's subjects."
Under the sanction of such authority he had not hesitated to
condemn, in his resolutions, the practice of exacting improper
fees in the very terms which were first used in the King's Corn.
mission, and were afterwards employed in the Act of the 4th of
George I. Hellcat reminded the House, that in the.year 1n1.4,
on a
Friendnthloeti3lnembbmerugfohrt ‘forrawt
earrid h
b r
db?
it
hadis
bßighteen admittedou ra Honourable
all hands that the fees exacted in the Courts of Justice in
Ireland demanded inquiry, and that in consequence a commis.
*ion of inquiry had been instituted. That commission had
presented several reports; and the question on which the House
had then to decide was, whether it would allow those reports to
remain as waste-paper, or would deal with diem as'the ground
of inquiry and judgment on the conduct of the Chief Baron of
Ireland. It was now the third Session since those reports had
been laid upon the table; and he trusted that when that cir-
cumstance was taken into consideration no individual would
think that he wait acting wrongly in calling upon the House to
decide upon them without further delay. The charge which
was brought against the Chief Baron in the reports in question
was, that he had taken other than the ancient fees to which he
was by law entitled—that he had introduced new fees, and had
increased the old ; anti that, by such conduct, he had increased
the charges of the suitor, anti had violated his duty as a Judge
of the land. He knew not what kind of answer would be offer.
eel to this charge. If it were asserted that a Judge, of his own
authority, had-a right to exact any fees that he thought proper,
and if' that assertion were to be considered as law, there was
nothing farther to be said on his part, and, as far as the
Chief Baron was concerned the mutter was brought to a
triumphant conclusion. But he contended, that, if such asser-
tions were made by the other 'side, they were not, maintain-
able ; and was prepared to prove, that if a Judge exacted im-
proper fees, under colour of his office, he was indictable at
common law, and was therefore liable to Parliamentary censure
if his conduct was submitted to Parliamentary discussion. Be-
fore he proceeded to the charges against the Chief Baron, he
thought it might be advisable for him to call the attention of the
House to this question—What are fees ? In the 27th report of the
Finance Committee, they were defined in thefollowing manner :
" Fees in a Court of Justice are se many direct taxes levied on the
King's subjects for the defraying the charges of' the offices to
which they are incident." The older authorities, however, car-
ried the point still further. Lord Coke stated, that under the
statute of Edward the Ist, the Crown had no power of itself to
increase the fees of an old office, or institute those of a new
one ; for that would be an imposition and tallage without the
consent of Parliament, If these authorities. were to be. relied
on, it was clear that'no judge possessed the right of creating
fees by his own authority for his own private emolument, and
he would next proceed to prove that if be did so exact fees, he
was guilty of a great misdemeanour. Blackstone said, " Ex-
tortion is an abuse of public justice, which consists in any Mil-
eer's unlawfully taking, by colour of his office, from any man
any money or thing or value that is not due to him, or more
than is due, or before it is clue. The punishment is line and
imprisonment, and sometimes a forfeiture of office." In this
opinion Serjeant Hawkins also concurred therefore, if lie
should be able to prove that the Chief Baron had taken that
which was not clue to him, or more than was due to him, he
should make out a case that would call upon the House to in-
terfere, unless it were of opinion that a judge had a right to
set a value upon his own labour, by introducerg fees that were
not sanctioned by ancient usage or supported by some express
act of Parliament. lie now came to the charges against the
Chief Baron, which were comprised under four distinct heads.
lie should, in the first instance, open the whole of his case,
and should afterwards, when he moved the specific resolutions
on each charge, refer to the evidence on which he remitted it.
All the font. heads of charge arose out of practices which had
originated with the present Chief Baron ; all were cases of
fees, Which were unsanctioned by ancient usage, and which
were instituted for his own emolument. The first head of
charge related toTees taken on a decree in the Court of. Exch-
equer. It was, perhaps, only right for him to state, that when
a case was brought into the Court of Exchequer, it was first of
all set down for hearing ; and that after it was so set down, it
was heard, and a decree obtained upon it, for which a fee was
paid to the Chief Baron. It happened, hoWever, that cases
were often set down for hearing which never came to a decree,
from a compromise being Made- by the parties. Ile would O.;
lustrate what he meant by reference to what daily occurred in
that House. Bills were often brought into that House, Which,
owing to various circumstances that they all could imagine,
were never. passed into laws. In the same manner cases were
instituted in the Court of Exchequer, in which decrees were
never obtained. The Chief 'Baron finding this to he so, saide-,
" Many persons obtain decrees surreptitiously, and do not tray
are my fees ; I will therefore change the time of taking them,'
and they shall be paid, not when the decrees are issued, but
when the cases arc set down for hearing." The Chief Baron