The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-06 00:00:00

THE THELLUSON WILL.

Lord LYNDHURST, pursuant to the notice he gave
last night, moved that the standing order, requiring peti-
tions for private Acts to be referred to the Judges, be
dispensed with.
Lord WYNFORD opposed the motion on the ground
that no reason had been stated why the standing order
should he Uispensed with. If it were a bad standing order
it should he repealed, but it would be a bad precedent to
dispense with it metely for the asking.

Lord ELDON opposed the motion as unprecedented.
The only case he recollected in which the standing order
had been dispensed with, was in a case of the Alarquis of
Hastings, in which both Scotch and English estates were
concerned, and in which, to save reference to the judges
of beth countries, the petition was referred to him, as
knowing something both of Scotch and English law, to
report upon.
The Eatl of SHAFTESBURY said that the only in-
stance of dispensing with the standing order, was
one in which property in Sergeant's Inn was con-
cerned, and the Judges being interested in that
property. the retition was referred to him (Lord Shaftes•
bury). He thought it would be a dangerous precedent to
dispense with the standing order.
The LORD CHANCELLOR supported the motion as
consistent with sub,tantial justice. He contended that
the will of the testator would be more completely carried
into eff- et by the House agreeing to the motion of his
Noble and Learned Friend, at the same time that he was
perfictly hware that there were no complaints from any
of the officets of the Court of Chaneery against things as
t'tey now stood. It was well known that the Mast rin
whose effice the cause was; derive d not less than from seven
to eight hundred pounds a year from the proceedings
therein ; and; though there were not wanting those, and
Actuaries too, who had calculated that the accumula.ions
might amount to eighty or ninety millions, and though
ere were those who seemed to fear that the existence of
such a property in the hands of one individual might en-
danger rise safety of the Constitution, yet such were the
retarding powers of the Court of Chancery, as was well
known to himself and to hie,,immediate predecessor, and
still better known to his Noble and Learned Friend now
sitting at the bottom of the Woolsack—such, he said, were
the retarding powers of that Court, that there did not at
present remain the slightest chance of any contingency
such as that which had been anticipated.
Lord WYNFORD said that he bad confined his taker-
vatiois to the suspension of the standing orders.
The Earl of MANSFIELD opposed the suspension of
the standing orders. It was his opinion that in the case
of a Bill like that they should rather enforce the standing
brder, with peculiar strictness than relax them.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said he should be glad to
aff ail the relief which it was the object of the Bill to
effect, but it would he only with the utmost reluctance that
I e could bring himself to consent to a suspension of the
:tanding orders. If it were necessary to get rid of them
its such a case as that, he suggested that the resolution
by which they were so suspended ought to declare the
peculiar circumstances under which the House was thus
induced to depart from its usual practice; and so he
thought much objection might be obviated. .

Lord LYNDHURST said it had been contended that
the Court of Chancery ought not, in such a case as the
present, to be complained of, and that nothing ought to
he objected to in the whole of those proceedings, b,cause
the charges made were perfectly regular. Now it was
exactly on that account that he objected to them, and
sought to put an end to them. The expen,ee, without
interest, were expected to amount to 250,0001., and if all
contingencies were t-ken into account they could not be
much under 500,0001. It had been supposed that the
suspension of the standing orders was very unusuo' ; i.e
would just mention that they had been suspended in the
case of Soane's Museum, and he had that morning found
no fewer than fifteen cases in which such a course had
been adopted. A case like that now under the considera-
tion of their Lot dships had never occurred before, and
there existed a statute which would prevent it ever occur•
ring again; it now therefore stood completely by itself,
and could form no precedent; he should therefore divide
the House.
The Duke of WELLINGTON considered that their
Lordships were bound to do all that they consistently
could for the relief of a family whose property was this
swallowed up by the proceedings of the Court of Chancery.
Had it been practicable to have brought forward a mea-
sure of that nature at an earlier period of the session, they
might not have the present discussion ; but it Wil9 irn •
possible for the parties, as he understood, to obtain the
necessary signatures to enable them to apply fur the relief
now sought. He hoped the House would not put off to
another year an act of justice greatly needed.
• The Earl of HARROWBY remarked, that had the
question been brought forward at an earlier period of the
session, the ordinary forms might have been observed,
and he was not disposed, on account merely of the lapse of
time, to set a new precedent, especially as those already
referred to had little analogy to the present case.
Earl GREY adverted to the painful situation in which
he was placed ; he had been much struck ley the state-
ment of his Learned Friend yesterday, and he felt a sin-
cere desire to set aside an unjust and cruel disposition of
property ; but when he was asked to suspend the standing
orders, he felt strongly the objections to that course. The
merits of the case had nothing to do with this question,
which was, whether the standing orders should be dis-
pensed with without special and sufficient circumstances ?
If no such special and sufficient circumstances existed, as
the guardians of the rights and privileges of the people,
the House was hound to maintain its orders, which were
adopted for the purpose of securing those privileges. The
regular course was, for all the parties to subscribe a peti-
tion ; that might have been done some months ago, or it
might even be done now, and he could not, therefore,
get over the difficulty of the standing order without
something like a direliction of duty. He saw no reason
why a petition, if it were now ready, might not be pre-
sented, and he recommended the Noble Lord to withdraw
his presant motion, with a view to the presenting of such
a petition.
Lord LYNDHURST hail reason to believe that he
should not be able to present a petition signed by all the
persons who, according to the standing order, ought to
subscribe it. He was in possession of a letter front one of
the trustees, stating his readiness to put i.is name to such
a petition : but he doubted much whether others would
'oilow his example.
The Duke of HAMILTON was of opinion that the
standing orders ought, excepting under very peculiar cir-
cumstances, to be held sacred ; any attempts to eet rid
of them would rend to debilitate the th cisiens of their
Lordships. At the same Cale, lie was anxious to concede
every facility to the p trties.
The Marquis of SALISBURY said, that although the
whole family was not formally before the flotrae by peti-
tion, there was no doubt that they were desirous that the
standing order should be suspended. He should give his
vote in order to accomplish that object.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was most ready to give
all possible relief to the family, which had unjustly suffered
tinder the administration of the law. At the some time,
as the standing orders were made for the protection of
property, he was reluctant to a'oandon them, unless it
could he shown that injustice would be done by adhering
to them. He understood that there might be rood rea-
sons why the trustees did not concur in a petition, but if
a petition were presented from the adults of the family, the
House might possibly dispense with the signature, of the
trustees. That point, might be worth the conSi.leration
of the Noble Lord, but of course it must depend upon the
nature of the information under which he acted.
Viscount MELBOURNE did not feel disputed to suss
peod the standing order witle ut a strong case of necessity
being shown ; but he thought that no stronger case, no
more especial ground could be pointed out, than that
which had been laid yesterday by the Noble, anf Learned
Lord. For a lung period this case bad been a scandal
to
society, and I e could not help hoping that the floese would
not allow a mere form to obstruct the course of sobstantiel
justice.
Tne Dales ofI',UCKINGHAM called up., it Lord-
ships to reflect upon the danger of establiahit.6 , sew Lee-

rodent for the suspension of an important standing order.
The House was unanimous in the opinion, that, if pus
sible, relief should be given ; and the most unobjectionable
course of proceeding seemed to be, to appoint a Committee,
to consider whether there was sufficient reason for the
I leprture from the standing order.
The Earl of RIPON recommended that the parties in-
terested should present a petition, even if it were not
signed by the trustees ; then the question would arise,
whether the obstinacy of those trustees should stand in the
way of an act of real jtlFrice. Unless such a petition were
hid before the House, he could not vote for the suspension
of the standing order. . .

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY observed that the
question was, the family versus the Court of Chancery.
lie did not far the establishment of a new precedent, a.
Le did not think the case could ever occur again.

Lord LYNDHURST suggested that the debate should
he adjourned until a future day, in order that measure,
might be taken for the presentation of a petition. He
feared that he should not be able to renew the subject until
Thursday next.
The further debate was therefore adjourned till Thursday.