The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-09 00:00:00

success in this et itntry. The Hon. Gentleman then moved
for leave to bring in a Bill to establish a general registry of
all deeds and instruments relating to real property in Eng-
land and Wales.
Mr. STRICKLAND maintained that the House ought
not to entertain this Bill, which had met with the almost
unanimous reprobation of the last Parliament. By its
being again brought forward, the country was kept in a
state of unwholesome agitation in respect to the rights of
property. It was a mere attempt to take business from
the country lawyers, and throw it into the hands of the
London ; it was bad in principle, would he most annoying
in practice, and opposed to the judgment and wishes of the
great body of the landed proprietors of the country.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL approved of the mea-
sure, and would give it his most zealous support. If the
Bill was passed into a law, the expense of registering
deeds would not be one-sixth of what they were under the
present system of registration. He even thought that
the expenses of the Registrar's Office in Yorkshire alone
would he sufficient to defray the costs of a general Metro-
politan, Office.
An Hoi.r. Miaieza did not doubt hut the intention of
Ml"d Learned Mover was to benefit the country
it late, but, as far as he could understand, the measure
t'voVeld not decrease the expenses, hut on the contrary in-
crease them. First, because every purchaser of an estate
would be obliged to come to London; and, secondly, be-
cause the machinety of the plan would cost so much to the
Govertittelat, arid consequently to the country, that there
t'ett'd bti ho visible saving by it.
oh. W. DUNCO,IBE would not oppose the measure
in its present stage, but he should do so afterwards, if
Yorkshire was included in it.
Mr. PEASE thought that in common courtesy they
ought to allow the present motion to pass, and that after-
wards improvements might he suggested, which, if not
attended to, would afford a fairer opportunity of opposing
the measure.
Mr. W. BROUGHAM said that any suggestions of
Hon. Members would, in the future stages of the Bill, be
taken into consideration.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
LORD DUNGLASS'S PENSION.
Mr. HUME rose to call in question the right of his
late Maj, sty to grant a pension to Lord Dungloot, The
question he was about to bring before the House was one
of great importance, because it involved a principle
which, if disallowed, would put an end to all sinecures
!mil pensions. The country was staggering under the
iweighlt of ita burdens, and one way to relieve it would be
to reptidiate the principle he alluded to. He held a table
'of.'
eesions in his hand, from which he would select one
or two, to show the evi effect of granting civil pensions.
There were two sinecures which dated from the year
1694, and which had, calculated to the present time,
cost the country 50 millions sterling. The sinecures he
meant were those of the two Chief Justices in Eyre.
Atother instance of this system t f civil pensions, was the
money peicl to one of the redo essors of the Right Hon.
'Gentleman in the Chair, to Mr. Sergeant On-low. The
'-rit'ney paid to li'm and his son was 163,0001. which,
;principal and inter, st calculat d, would now amount to
the sum of about 373,0001. paid by the country for ser-
vices he was sure no Member of that House would be
willing to pay so highly for. Another instance was the
pension of 2761. paid to the Earl of Home for services no
one knew anything about, and which, calculated with in-
terest, from the:time it was granted up to the present time,
would amount to 36,5601., or thereabtarts. Happening
in a Committee up stairs to m ike an inquiry as to the dis
burssments paid out of the Scotch Exchequer, Le found
one that struck Lim exceedingly. It was the min of
-3601. paid to Lord Dunglass as Chamberlain of Ettrick
Forest. This sinecure dated from before the Union, and
was origirally eight pounds ten shillings, Scotch money.
In a Committee of Inquiry on sinecures and pensions, held
in the year 1810, a resolution was passed relative to this
identical pensh n. Now, what he complained of was, that
after that resolution, the sinecure should be renewed. H-'
contended that the Sovereign, having a right to the Crown
Revenues only during his life time, had no power to make
Tiny grant out of them which should endure beyond the pe-
riod of his lie, because such a grant would interfere with
the rights of his successors in the event that the grrntee
survived hits. This was the case with Lord Dunglass,
who had survived George the Fourth. He (Mr. Hume)
thought they should put an end to proceedings of this
kind, as a useless ant improper expenditure of the public
money. He concluded by moving, " That an humble
address be presented so his Majesty, praying that he would
be graciously pleased to issue a commission to the law-
officers of the Crown to inquire into the validity of the
appointment of Lord Dunglass as Chamberlain of
Forest, and into his right to that office subsequent to the
death of George the Fourth.
An HON. MEMBER (name unknown) seconded the
motion.

The LORD ADVOCATE said, that it was his own
professional opinion that the grant was ; but he
thought it would he unbecoming in the House to adjudi-
cate in the matter in the absence of the party concerned
in the icquiry. It was certainly extraordinary that a
salary of 3001 should be given for collecting rents amount-
ing to 230/. The office was, however, really a pension
in disguise, and it was a pity it bad been placed on the list
o' Scotch pensions, which, though they legally expired oa
the demise of George the Fourth, were renewed by the
present Sovereign. The Government did not mean to
oppose the motion of the Hon. Member for Middlesex.
An HoN. Mintnitn said, that if his Noble Friend
Lord Dungiass were present, he would be the first to court
investigation.
After a few words from Mr. HUME, the motion was
agreed to.