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

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, March 7.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.
DESIGNS ACTS EXTENSION BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table the
Tithe Commissionerb' Report for 1850.

PETITIONS.
Lord BEAUMONT presented a petition from the Law
Society against the second clause of the Law of Evidence
Bill which authorised the examination of parties to the
suit and their wives; he personally did not agree with
the prayer of the petition, because such evidence would
always be taken for what it was worth, and the evi-
dence of the parties might lead to the discovery of fur-
ther evidence; but still the opinions of the petitioners
were entitled to attention, and he hoped the Bill would
be referred to a Select Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM bore evidence to the high re-
spectability of the petitioners; but forty-nine out of fifty
of the county court judges had reported in favour of the
plan.

The Earl of ENNISKILLEN presented a petition
from Galway praying for the establishment of a packet
station on the west coast of Ireland.
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 101. 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, sad
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 had these changes been, that it some of the emi-
nent lawyers who had died within the last quarter of a
century were to revisit Westminster lull they would
seemly believe that they were in the same country in
which they bad passed their lives. He had himself; in
1840, introduced as 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 regretter
that more had not, been done. Last year a measure was
proposed extending the jurisdiction of these courts to
501. 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 months
1,200,000 causes had been disposed of in these county
courts, being at the rate of 420.000 causes ayear, and
the amount of property adjudicated on must have been
about 2,000,0004 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 bad 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 countycourt for decision, so
that instead of parties being brought from Cornwall
to Chancery-Jane, 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
havenotemptation to protract proceedings, because he was
not paid by the number of sotings, but was paid a fixed
salary. But he 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, theta
must be a better and worse class, and as a skilful
and honourable solicitor was the greatest blessing a
i e;ghbourhood 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 ease ; he proposed that no
i.: . arise!, no sttornPy should attend the court of reconcilt-
merit. but that the parties should go unattended by legal
.4d visers and state their case. The judge wou'd at once
see whether or nil a party had good grounds for proceed-
mg, arid it he had none, and the judge told bite so, in
eine 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
:he case here they would gradually assume the
eharacler of courts of law rather than of
courts of reconcilement, and therelore he did
cot propose to make them compulsory. In Switzerland,
in some of the cantons it was compulsory, in others it
was optional; where it was compuls-ry it was said to fail,
where voluntary it succeeded. These courts were most suc-
cessful in Denmark and in Hamburg's, and the number
of causes brought before the courts of law had di-
miniehed 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 fur 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 lie had alluded.
These were the provisions of the Bill which he
i.ad 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 iu one year, only
tine hay-third of the number was appealed against. The
value adjudicated upon was 300,000/., only 6,000/. had
been appealed against. Nothing ceuld be more ueju,t
than to render a suitor liable to expense for that protection
:, hteh the country was bound to give biro in return for
his allegiance. This principle had been unanswerably
demonstrated by the profound and learned Jeremy Ben-
ham. 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 incresse 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; if they
d!cl not they would either have hurried decisions or un-
due delay. He agreed that it was a great abuse, that a
person seeking justice should have to pay for it. Justiee
was the subject's right, and the country wag bound
e
to render it to him, yet at the same time they
were
bound to allow an adequate remuneration tdthe
agents
to
who were employed, and who devoted their time
acting for the suitors.
n to
Lord BEAUMONT thonght.
get rid altogether of the be
ris d advisablei
c t io
limitation.tien irduced a debtor
;hese courts to 50/. This limitation it wouldfotuhlde bi
portion of his claim.
He to abandon
owing more than 501. to haold out, and thus force his
jurisdiction o
b
courts
in sums a Ove 2Ol. d one away with,
the superior
He should also wish to ace the concurrent f
as many attorneys took causes which. might well have
of costs. He objected to the proposition of
freeing suitors from all payments for justice, its it would
teed to promote litigation, and was therefore
dangerous.
is county courts into
for the the decided
s sake the superior courts
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
150,000/. a year in the shape of fees, which amounted
on an average to 101.;per head per suitor.
After a few words from the LORD CHANCELLOR,
Lord BROUGHAM replied, and the Bill was read a
first time.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

_.,..______
HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 7.
The SPEAKER took the Chair a few minutes to Four
o'clock.

NEW MEMBER>
Mr. PRINSEP, the new Member for Harwich, took
the oaths and his seat. The Hon. Gentleman was in-
troduced by Mr. 'lorries and Mr. F. Mackenzie.
ABOLITION OF THE OFFICE OF LOHD-LIEU-

TENANT OF IRELAND.
The Lord Mayor of Dublin, accompanied by several
Aldermen, appeared at the bar, and presented a r.e:i!ion
from the corp.ration of that city, against the abolition
of the office of Lord-Lieutenant.
SECOND READINGS.

The following Bills were reed a second time, and or.
&red to be counnittedi—
Lancashire said Yorkshire Railway (Fifth Share).
Metropolitan Cattle Matkt.
COPPER MINER'S IN ENGLAND.
On the mutton that. tLe Copper Miners in England
Bill be read a becund

Mr. SI6ONER objected to the Bill on the ground
that the principle of it wail to set aside the
claims of ,all the creditors of the company unless
they became partnere in the undertaking, which lag for