The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-08 00:00:00

COUNTY COURTS EXTENSION BILL.

Lord BROUGHAM rose to move the second reading
of the County Courts Extension Bill. So long ago as
the year 1825 Lord Althorp brougbt in a Bill for the
better recovery of small debts. That Bill went
but a little way; it merely proposed to give
jurisdiction to small debt courts in cases in which the
amount in dispute did not exceed 10/. Lord Althorp
handed over the Bill to the late Sir R. Peel, who was
always anxious to promote any measure of law reform,
and Sir R. Peel cheerfully undertook the task of reform.
Two Commissions of Inquiry into the common law, and
another for inquiring into the law of real property,
were issued by Sir R. Peel, and the reports of those
Commissioners were most valuable, and many impor-
tant changes had been introduced, grounded upon
the reports of those Learned Commissioners;' and so im-
perfect bad these changes been, that if some of the emi-
nent lawyers who had died within the last quarter of a
century were to revisit Westminster Hall they would
scarcely believe that they were in the same country in
which they had passed their lives. He had himself, in
1840, introduced a Bill for establishing courts of local ju-
risdiction. In that Bill he had originally given jurisdiction
to local courts, in cases of debt, to 1001, but on the re-
presentation of the Commissioners he had reduced it to
201. That Bill was rejected by a small majority com-
posed of proxies. In 1842, Lord Lyndhurst had intro-
duced a Bill which was in all essentials identical with the
Bill which afterwards became law, and he regretted
that more had not been done. Last year a measure was
proposed extending the jurisdiction of these courts to
50/. in cases of debt. There was no man who could
deny that these county courts had worked admirably.
In every man's neighbourhood a tribunal existed where
a man's dispute with his neighbours could be speedily
and cheaply settled. In two years and nine mouths
1,200,000 causes had been disposed of in these county
courts, being at the rate of 420,000 causes a-year, and
the amount of property adjudicated on must have been
about 2,000,0001. a••year. The last year's Act gave an
appeal upon points of law upon sums above 201.
In five months 4,000 of these causes had been disposed
of, and there had not been more than four appeals.
Now, so far as regarded contentious jurisdiction, so far
as regarded the ousting of the jurisdiction of the superior
courts, he did not propose to extend the jurisdiction of
these courts. The four classes which were included in the
Bill of 1830, but which were now excluded by the county
court jurisdiction,were bankruptcy,equitable jurisdiction,
arbitration, and courts of reconcilement. He proposed to
extend the jurisdiction of the county courts to cases of
bankruptcy, gradually to absorb the bankruptcy juris-
diction in that of the county courts. He also proposed
that all matters upon which a Master in Chancery
could decide should be, upon the order of the Court of
Chancery, remitted ,fo a countytcourt for decision, so
that instead of parties being brought from Cornwall
to Chancery-lane, they should have equity administered
to them in their own district. He also proposed that
all parties, whatever might be the cause or the amount
in dispute, should be enabled to submit the matter in
dispute to the county court judge as an arbitrator, sub-
ject only to have points of law, as is the case at present
with regard to arbitration, raised in the superior courts
on their award. In a great variety of cases at present,
more particularly in cases of disputed amount,
when a case became ripe for trial it was found that it
was impossible to try it by a judge and jury, and the
judge ordered such a case to be referred.
Now he proposed to give parties a power of
referring such a case at once to a county court
judge. (Hear, hear.) In ordinary cases of
arbitration there was sometimes a tendency to
protract proceedings. Now the county court judge would
have no temptation to protract proceedings, because be was
not paid by the number of sittings, but was paid a fixed
salary. But be set still greater store by his proposition
to make these county courts courts of reconcilement. It
was proposed that any party suing or sued
on any matter whatever might cite his adversary
to appear before a county court judge in reconcilement,
and the parties thus uppearing might state, the one his
cause of grievance and the other his defence. In every
profession, and in the law as well as others, there
must be a better and worse class, and as a skilful
and honourable solicitor was tilt greatest blessing a
neighbourhood could have, so there could not be
a greater curse than one of the worst class. But a
respectable solicitor might be misled as to the
merits of his client's case ; he proposed that no
counsel, no attorney should attend the court of reconcile-
ment, but that the parties should go unattended by legal
advisers and state their case. The judge would at once
see whether or not a party had good grounds for proceed •
ing, and if he had none, and the judge told him so, in
nine cases out of ten litigation would cease. These courts
had been tried on the continent and had succeeded.
In France they were compulsory; but if that were
the case here they would gradually assume the
character of courts of law rather than of
courts of reconcilement, and therefore he did
not propose to make them compulsory. In Switzerland,
in some of the cantons it was compulsory, in others it
was optional; where it was compulsory it was said to fail,
where voluntary it succeeded. These courts were most suc-
cessful in Denmark and in Hamburgb, and the number
of causes brought before the courts of law had di-
minished two-thirds since the introduction of courts of
reconcilement. The introduction, of these courts would
put a stop to the system of attorneys telling clients they
were sure to gain, and then asking them for 401. or 50/.
on account to carry on the cause, because the client
would at once go to the county court judge and get his
opinion. This reconcilement process, coupled with
the arbitrative power, would at once prevent the occur-
rence of scenes such as those to which he had alluded.
These were the provisions of the Bill which he
bad introduced to their Lordships' attention. In
Scotland they had long possessed the advantage
of local courts, and almost all cases were
originated in the courts of the sheriffs depute, and out
of 22,000 cases brought in these courts in ens year, only
one fifty-third of the number was appealed against. The
value adjudicated upon was 300,000/., only 6,0001. bad
been appealed against. Nothing could be more unjust
than to tender a suitor liable to expense for that protection
whieh the country was bound to give him in return for
his allegiance. This prieciple had been unanswerably
demonstrated by the profound and learned Jeremy Ben-
tham. He did not take any blame to himself for
any undue haste in proposing these measures,
for he felt that it would have been desirable to have
established local courts with these extended jurisdic-
tions many years ago, and this establishment would
tend to increase the respect of the people for the law.
Lord LANGDALE was convinced that the adminis-
trative points of the bankrupt law, and of the
Court of Chancery might be well adminis-
tered by the county courts. He never could
see any reason why parties residing in the coun-
try should be compelled to come before a Master
in Chancery sitting in Chancery-lane. He believed
that in matters of arbitration it was of importance to
have as an arbitrator a person in authority. They
should bear in mind that if they extended the
jurisdiction of these courts, they must have judges
enough—they must have ample judicial power; it they
did not they would either have hurried decisions or un-
due delay. lie agreed that it was a great abuse, that a
person seeking justice should have to pay for it. Justice
was the subject's right, and the country was bound
to render it to him, yet at the same time they were
bound to allow an adeqaate remuneration to the agents
who were employed, and who devoted their time to
acting for the suitors.
be advisable to
Lord BEAUMONT thought it
wouldf
the jurisdiction of
get rid altogether of the limitation
itatio% induced a debtor
theseowing courtsmo
re than to 505
out, and thus force his
s portion of his claim..
creditor to abandon
the concurrent jurisdiction of
He should also wish to ace
• courts in sums above 201. done away with,
the superior
attorneys took causes which might well have
as many
decided in county courts into the superior courts
been
for the sake of costs. He objected to the proposition of
freeing suitors from all payments for justice, as it would
tend to promote litigation, and was therefore dangerous.
1-01.
tToebisolldim
Lord CRANWORTH considered it all right that the
losing party should be compelled to pay his adversary's
cost, but what was objected to was, the tax upon justice.
Now in the Court of Chancery this tax amounted to
yearge in
to O / .the
:p shape e rh
lral ver°aLaaea d of
ffeseustlor. which amounted
o
After a few words from the LORD CHANCELLOR,
Lord BROUGHAM replied, and the Bill was read a
first time.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, March 7. The SPEAKER took the Chair a few roinutea to Four
o'clock.

NEW MEMBER.
PRINSEP, the new Member for Harwich, took
tho oathi, and his seat. The Hon. Gentleman wa; in-
troduced by Mr. Ilerries and Mr. F. Alaclienzie.
ABOLITION OF THE OFFICE OF LORD-LIEU-

TENANT OF IRELAND.
The Lord Mayor of Dublin, accompanied by se: el al
Aldermen, appeared at the bar, and presented a I eition
from the corporation of that city, against the a:Vition
of the office of Lord-Lieutenant.
SECOND READINGS.

The following Bills were read a second tiny?, and or-
dered to be c:.,tornitted
Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway (Fifth S lure ).

Metropolitan Cattle Market.
COPPER MINER'S IN ENGLAND.
On the motion that the Copper Miners in England
Bill be read a second time,
Mr. SPOONER objected to the Bill on the ground
that the principle of it was to set aside the
claims of all the creditors of the company unless
they became partners in the undertaking, which had for

oTny years been in a. bankrnpt state. A great number
egdebentnres had been issued by the company, and the
ect of this Bill would be to render them entirely va-
lueless, except where the holders of them chose
to become proprietors. He, therefore, hoped the
House would not give its assent to so unjust
and monstrous a proposition. The Honourable Member
moved that it be read a second time this day six months.
Sir DE LACY EVANS supported the second read-
ing of the Bill.
Mr. MUNTZ would be exceedingly sorry if this
Bill were passed, and he thought that everybody be-
longing to the concern would be sorry too that they had
aver got it.
Mr. BOOKER protested against the principle of this
Bill being entertained by the House.
Mr. MACGREGOR supported the second reading of
the Bill.
Mr. BROTHERTON thought that the Bill ought to
Fo into Committee, in order to give opportunities for
investigation.
Mr. G. C. LEGII opposed the Bill.
The House then divided, when there appeared—.
For the second reading
Against it
Majority
—57
The Bill was then read a second time.
PETITIONS.
Mr. TANCRED presented a petition from the Catho-
lics of Banbury against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill.
Mr. L. HODGES presented a petition against the re-
moval of Smithfield Cattle Market.
Sir DE LACY EVANS presented' a petition from
Westminster praying for the repeal of the window-tax.
Mr. S. ADAIR presented a petition prayieg for a re-
peal of the taxes on knowledge.
Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a petition against the
Papal aggression, and praying for the suppression of
Jesuit astablishments.
Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented two pet',
tions from Preston against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY presented four petitions
against the Government measure for the removal of
Smithfield, and a petition from the butchers of Enfield
praying to be heard by counsel against the Bill,
BOARD OF CUSTOMS.
Mr. MITCHELL gave notice that on an early day
he should move for the appointment of a Select Com-
mittee to inquire into the management of the Board of
Customs, with a view to its improvement—(Hear, hear)
—and saving expense to the country.
Mr. MACGREGOR and several other Hon. Members
presented petitions to the House, and postponed motions
of which they bad given notice.
CHANCERY REFORM.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL gave notice that it was his
intention to bring in a Bill on an early day for a reform
in the practice of the Court of Chancery.
THE KAFIR WAR.

Sir DE LACY EVANS begged to ask the Noble Lord
at the head of the Government a question respecting the
intentions of the Ministry in providing for the expensesof
the contest. He put this question in the hope that the
colonists would have to bear the weight of their own con-
flicts.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that all he could
say at present was, that his Noble Friend at the
head of the Colonial Department had written to the
Governor of the colony, enjoining him in the strongest
manner to take care that no expenditure should
be incurred, in the event of a Kafir war, which
would fall on the Government of this country. The co-
lony must, therefore, be expected to bear its own ex-
penses. At the present time it was impossible to say
more than this—that with the exception of sending out
a necessary reinforcement, no expense would be incurred
in respect of the war without the sanction of the House.
Sir W. MOLES WORTH wished to know whether
the Under-Secretary for the Colonies had any official
information with regard to the commencement of the
war?

Mr. HAWES said, as soon as any dispatches were
received they would be laid on the table of the House;
but he might observe that he believed too much
importance had been attached to the information which
had been circulated among the public. No dispatch had
yet been received from the Governor, and the only
dispatch which the Government were in possession of
was that of the Colonial Secretary, which communicated
the nature of the events in the colony up to the
4th of January last. The reason why no dispatch
was received from the Governor was that at that time
he was surrounded by a large body of liaars.—(Loui
laughter.) Since that date Sir H. Smith, with that cha-
racteristie gallantry, skill, and courage which belonged
to him, had emancipated himself frm all his difficulties,
and gallantly cut his way through hordes of barbarians.
—(Cheers.) A steamer was expected every hour with
fresh advices, bringing accounts up to a period three
weeks later than those last received.
EXCISE.
Colonel SIBTHOBP wished to know whether it was
true that the chairmsn cf the Excise, Sir John Wood,
had received an increase of ‘OOl a year, in addition to
his salary of 2,0001?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, if
the Gallant Member would treive for the necessary mi-
nute on the subject, he .would be glad to state the rea-
sons why that increase tad been made.
CEYLON.
In reply to Mr. BAILLIE,
Mr. HAWES said he would lay the rtpott of tho
Royal Commission on Ceylon en the table of the House
to-aight, and it wcuid probably be placed in the hands
of Members to-morrow.
EXTENSION OF THE FRANCHISE TO
COUNTIES.

M. LOCKE KING brought up his Bill for the exten-
sion i f Ow county franchise to 101. householders.
The Hon. Member, on appearing at the bar with the
Bill, was received with cheers.
The Bill was ordered to be read a second time on the
2d of April.—(Cries of "The let of April," and
laughter.)
MINISTERIAL STATEMENT.

On the motion that the House on its rising adjourn
till Monday next,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said,— Sir, in rising to
move that the House at its rising adjourn till
Monday next, I will make the statement which
I promised on Monday last. My Right llon. Friend
the Secretary of State for the Home Department will,
on the reading of the order of the day for the second
reading of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, state the altera-
tions and modifications which we propose to make in
that Bill, and, as they are extensive, I propose after
that statement has been made to postpone the second
reading of the Bill until Friday next.—(Hear, hear.)
With respect to the general business of the session, I
should state that a considerable interval having taken
place, in which L.,) public business has been transacted, it
is most desirable that we should proceed with as little
delay as possi_lo, and, therefore, on Monday next
I propose that the House shall go into Com-
mittee on the Navy Estimates. As I have
proposed a postponement of the second reading of the '
Ecclesiastical Titles Bill until Friday, I trust that there
will be no opposition on the part of Hon. Members who
aro opßosed to the Bill, to go into Committee on an
early say after reading the Bill a second time,
supposing that the House ihould pass the second
reading. It will be necessary to take some votes with
regard to the army and ordnance estimates, and espe-
cially to take a vote for the r umber of men required in
the srmy, as the House is aware that the Mutiny Bill
expirks on till 20th of April, and the Easter
vacation intervenes before that day. Ido not pro-
pose to take any vote on account of the Income-tax
until Mondry, the 24th, and on the Friday preceding,
that is on the 21st, my Right Hon. Frit nd the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer will state any alterations which
he has to propose with regard to the financial measures
of the session.
The motion for the adjournment was then carried.
PETITIONS.—PAPAL AGGRESSION.

On the motion fn. the second reading of the Bill,
Mr. STUART presented a petition against the
Bill from the Bishops of the 2.celesiastical Church of
Scotland, which he moved should be read by the Clerk
at the table.
The petition was then read at length by the Clerk at
the table.

Lord ARUNDEL and SURREY presented a petition
against the Bill from the R-)man Catholic 3 of Wales.
Dr. POWER presented a similar petition from Cork.
ir• REYNOLDS presented a petition to the same
effect signet by 6,000 of the Roman Catholic inhabit-
ants of St. Mary's, St. Thomas'e, and St. George's, Dub-
lin. On the motion of ,:he Hen. Gentleman the petition
was read by the Clerk at the table.
Sir WILLIAM CLAY presented a petition against
the Bill from the Roman Catholics of the Tower Ham-
lets.
Mr. COBDEN presented a similar petition from the
Roman Catholics of Yorkshire.
mr. o'CONNELL presented ten similar petitions
from places in Ireland, and praying that the revenues of
to the relief of the poor.
the Protestant Church might in future be appropriated
Mr. A. GORE presented a petition to the same effect
from Sligo.
Mr. CAYLEY
presented two similar petitions from
places in the West Riding.
Lord JOHN MANNERS presented a petition to the
the same effect from the Roman Catholics of Colchester.
Petitions were then presented by mr. . Cardwell, from
Liverpool; by Mr. Clement, Mr. Leonard, Mr. Bennet
and Mr. Roche, from the county of Cork; by other
members from the county of Down; hy, philip
Howard, from Dreier, signed by upwards of. 3,000 of the
artz uts labourers, and other members cf the community
or Exeter. (Some amusement vt,as occasioned in the
House, and not a little la'ughter, by the lion. Member
going to the wrong side of the table to give )is petition
to th Clerk of the fleuse). The petition was ordered
to lie on the table.
Mr. GRATTAN presented a petition from several
thousand pe(.p:p in Ir,iand to the same effect.
,Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a petition from Cl 6 per-
sons of conditi,:n and character who desired to re-
sist the Papal aggression. They Exprcs4d a strong
hope that the officers of Government would resist this-
agression ; yet, while expressing this hope, they at the
same time said that the last thought in their minds was
to oppose anything like a barrier to the progress of civil
and religious liberty.
Mr. MOR.GAN JOHN O'CONNELL presented pe-
titions against the Bill from the Roman Catholics of
Listowell and several other places in Ireland.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON presented a petition from
13,000 inhabitants of Manchester against the BilL