The Sun.
London, England, 1851-08-01 00:00:00

UMPERI

LIOUSE OF LORDS. ,fuly 31.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Woo!-
sack at Five o'clock.
ECCLESIASTICAL RESIDENCES (IRELAND)
BILL.

Lord REDESDALE brought up th© report on this
Bill.

PETITIONS.
The Earl of ENNISKILLEN presented several
petitions from places in Ireland in favour of the Eccle-
siastical Tides Assumption Bill.
Lord W HARNCLIFFE presented several petitions
in favour of the preservation of the Crystal Palace.
LEASEHOLD TENURE OF LAND (IRELAND)
ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the third read-
ing of this Bill. •
After a few observations from the Marquis of Donegal
Lord Beaumont, and Lord Monteagle, the Bill was read

a third time and passed.
MERCANTILE MARINE ACT AMENDMENT

_
BILL.
On the motion of Earl GRANVILLE, this Bill was

passed through Committee.
STOCK-IN-TR,ADE BILL.
Earl GRANVILLE moved the third reading of this
Bill.
The Earl of MALMESBURY did not intend to op-
pose the third reading of the Bill, but he could not suf-
fer it to pass without a few observations. This Bill was
regularly introduced every year, and passed almost as a
matter of course. Yet it was clear that stock in trade
was liable to be rated to the poor-rates, but that the
difficulties in the way of rating it were such that
it was necessary to introduce this Bill every year.
The consequence was, that the burden of maintaining
the poor fell upon the real property of the country.
All the ameliorations which had recently taken place
had been for the benefit of persons engaged in trade,
and who, by this Bill, were also exempted
from the burden of maintaining the poor, and
it was the duty of the Government to propose such
alterations in the law of parochial settlement as would give
to the landed interest that relief from parochial burdens
to which they were entitled. A Bill regulating parochial
settlement had been promised by the Government, but
had not been brought forward; and he should like to hear
from some momber of the Government a reason why
this Bill had not been brought forward. The agricultu-
ral class had by free trade suffered a depreciation of their
property of 15 per cent., and yet the burdens of the poor
fell exclusively upon that class.
Earl GREY said that a Bill on the subject of paro-
chial assessment had long been drawn up, but it could
only be introduced into the other !louse of Parliament,
and there bad been no opportunity during the present
session of introducing it with any prospect of passing it,
for there was no subject on which such a variety of
opinions existed as on the law of settlement, yet
he acknowledged that there was no law which
stood in greater need of amendment than that law. Ho
would not, however, refrain from reminding his Noble
Friend that year after year the proportion of these bur-
dens borne by the landlord was rapidly diminishing,
and that great relief from these burdens had been already
afforded to the lauded interest.
The Marquis of SALISBURY expressed a hope
that the Bill to be introduced upon that subject next
session would not be one of a merely temporary

character.
After a few words from Earl GRANVILLE,
The Bill was read a third time and passed.
THE CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR having moved the third
reading of this Bill,
The Earl of MALMESBURY said he thought they
would not be treating the other House fairly by sending
down to that House a Bill of that importance, with not
less than ninety clauses, within four or five days of its
close of the session. He believed that their Lordships
would not give assent to a Bill brought before them
under similar circumstances.
The LORD CHANCELLOR expressed a hope that
their Lordships would assent to the Bill, which he
looked upon as one of a very valuable character, and
the merits of which had already been fully canvassed.
He thought it likely that the other House would adopt
th measure; and he further believed that their Lord-
shie ps ought to pass it whatever might bo its fate else-
where.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said that he thought
her Majesty's Government must have been guilty of
what he should call inexcusable carelessness in not
having brought forward that measure at an earlier
period of the session. Why, ho would,ask, had it not
been introduced in that House during the first three
months of the session, when their Lordships had had
little or no business of any kind to discharge?
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that as a member of the
Commission that had inquired into that subject, he could
state that the Bill had not been brought under the con-
sideration of the*Government until after the commence-
ment of the session.
The Marquis of SALISBURY said that he thought
his Noble Friend whe had preceded him had taken
blame to himself, and that if the Commission had been
as diligent as it ought to have been, the Bill could
have been brought before Parliament at an earlier period
of the session. He believed that if the House of Com-
mons were to do their duty to their constituents, they
would not pass the measure during the present session.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
COURT OF CHANCERY AND JUDICIAL COM-
MITTEE BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving the second
reading of this Bill, said that as considerable arrears had
taken place in the appeal business before the Court of
Chancery it had been thought desirable to increase the
judicial staff for dealing with that business. The means
which had at first been suggested for carrying out that
object had led to considerable difference of opinion; but
after much discussion and consideration the present Bill
had been brought forward, and had been fortunate enough
to receive the approbation of all those whose attention
bad been directed to the subject. The main object of
the Bill was to create new. judges for hearing appeal
cases, and it would also provide that those judges should
be members of the Judicial Committee. The duties of
that Committee had become exceedingly important, and
it had therefore been thought desirable that its members
should receive the aid of the new judges when these
judges should not be engaged in the Court of Chan-
cery. The Bill did not deal with the general question
of the administration of justice in that court, and their
Lordships were no doubt aware that a Commission
which had recently been appointed was at present en-
gaged in investigating, that important subject. Ho was
authorised to state that a Noble and Learned Lord (Lord
Lyndhurst, wo believe), on whose opinion the House de-
servedly set a very high value, decidedly approved of
the Bill then under their Lordships' consideration, and
that it had also met with the approval of another Noble
and Learned Lord (Lord Brougham, we believe) then
absent from indispoeition. All those legal gentlemen,
who had given an opinion upon the subject, had also
expressed themselves in favour of the measure. He
trusted, therefore, that their Lordships would see no
reason to refuse their assent to the second reading of the
Bill. He would take that opportunity of correcting an
erroneous impression which very generally prevailed, to
the effect that hardly any attempt had been made in re-
cent titres to improve the administration of justice in the
Court Chiencery. The truth was that for a period of
more than 20 years the attention of the heads of that
court bad been constantly directed to that subject, and
that se series of great improvements had been the result of
those labours. In the year 1824 Lord Eldon, who had
at that time been Lord Chancellor, had caused a Com-
mission to be appointed for the purpose of inquiring ge-
nerally into the practice of the Court of Chancery, and
that Commission, which had consisted of between twenty
and thirty legal gentlemen of the highest distinction,
after an inquiry which had lasted two years, had pro-
duced, as the result of its labours, an immense folio
volume, containing a vast number of most useful sug-
gestions. In the year 1827 Lord Lyndhurst had suc-
ceeded to the office of Lord Chancellor, and that Noble
and Learned Lord, after having directed his attention to
the report of the Commission appointed under Lord
Eldon, had in the year 1828 issued a number of orders
for expediting and cheapening business in the Court of
Chancery. In the year 1830 an Act had been passed
for the purpose of improving th© jurisdiction of that
court, and also for the purpose of amending the prac-
tice of the court in regard to commitments for con-
tempt. That latter measure, which was known as Sir E.
Sugden's Act, had very .much mitigated the severity of
the law in relation to those commitments. In the year
1832, Lord Brougham had become Lord Chancellor, and
in the year 1833 that Noble and Learned Lord had is-
sued a great number of orders for improving the practice
of the Court. There had been issued altogether, since
the Great Seal had been committed to Lord Lyndhurst,
not less than between 500 or 600 orders for the accom-
plishment of the same object. In the year 1840, Lord
Cottenham had issued an additional number of those
orders. Since that time three or four Acts of Parliament
had been passed for the purpose of diminishing the ex-
pense of suits in the Court of Chancery, and of facilitat-
ing the transaction of business in that Court. When he
(the Lord Chancellor) had last year been raised to the
office which ho had then the honour to fill he had issued
30 or 40 orders; and he believed that no one was more
convinced than he was that the administration of justice
ought to be improved to the utmost possible extent. A
committee, consisting of seven or eight legal gentlemen,
had some time since been appointed for the purpose of
inquiring into the best means of improving the ad-
ministration of justice in the Court of Chancery; and
to that commission there had lately been added, on
the recommendation of the House of Commons, two lay
gentlemen, whose labours, in co-operation with those
of members of the legal profession, would, ho trusted,
lead to the most valuable results. Much, no doubt, still
remained to be done for the improvement of the Court of
Chancery; but the complaint that nothing had hitherto
been done for the attainment of that object was utterly
unfounded. Ho believed that the only ground fur sur-
prise was that so much had been done in that way, in
spite of the great complexity and extent of the interests
with which the Court of Chancery had to deal. All the
former commissions which had inquired into that sub-
ject had been authorised to deal merely with the prac-
tice of the Court, while the present commission would
also address itself to the jurisdiction of the Court, with a
view to ascertain what alterations might with itdrantage
be effected in that jurisdiction. He believed that the
Bill then before them would be productive of consider-
able ,advantage, by adding to the appellate force in the
Court of Chancery, and by enabling the Lord Chancel-
lor to give more of his attention than he could heretofore
have given to the business which came before their
Lordship. He trusted that, under these circumstances,
they would have no hesitation in aesenting to the second
reading of the measure.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said he believed it was
well
known that although his Noble and Learned Friend then
absent from the House (Lord Lyndhurst) approved of
the Bill as far as it went, he regarded it as merely a