The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-08 00:00:00

THE AFFAIRS OF ITALY.

Lori J. RU ELL sai lit was desirable that the
house on an early day should be informed of what had
been done by foreign Cr-mernment4 with regard to Ita
Tian affairs. (Cheers.) He should theref.ra move on Fri
day or Monday next for c )pies of the correspoudence
between foreign Glvernrnents on this question, be-
csuse it was desirable the house should know
if any fruits might be expected from the declaration
made at the late Conference at Paris.
NIEDICIL PROFESSION BILL.

Mr. COWPER statei that he Intendt:d t► abanion
this bill for the present session.

THE VACCINATION BILL.

Mr. COWPER said it wa, his intention to pro-
zeed with this bill at whatever hour it might come on in
order.

WAYS AND MEANS.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCEIEQUER brought
up the report on Ways and Means.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY took objection 3 to it, hu: it
was ultimately agreed to.

THE TIPPERARY BANK.

Col. F. FRENCH wished t ► correct a matter which
appeared to him to reflect on the character of one of the
most talented an 1 honourable men on the judicial bench
either in England or Ireland. The Attorney-General fur
Ireland had stated tbat it would be owing to the irregu-
lar conduct of the Master of tbe Rolls if any failure of
justice took place in Mr. J. Sadleir's case.

- The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND quite
agreed in the high character awarded the Master of
the Rolls, but must repeat that the observations which
fell from the Master of the R (lls were irregular.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that he (lid not want to
go back to the old system. All that he had.said W.tP, that
the statesmen of George 111 's reign were wiser men
than they were, because when they wanted to get ac
c'iunts they pt them. He ',till inainta ned that they
ought not to stultify themselves by passing a revolution
about what they had no informAtion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER Paid the
hon. baronet was wrong in assuoneg that the Govern-
ment desired to withbohl any informatoon from the house.
Trey wished to lay all information connected with tho.,e
accounts before the house, and they only delayed cloti.g
so because it was absolutely necessary to wait till the
accfsunt-i were completed.
Mr. WILLIAMS said that there were several clauses
in the Approprialon Bill.to which he bad objections,
and he hoped it would be printA.
Mr. WILSON said that be held the bill in his hand,
and that he would introduce it that night and have it
printed.

APPELLATt JURISDICTION (LIOUSE OF
LORDS) BILL.

On the oreor of the day for the second raadiog of this
bill,

Mr. E. DENISON said be had a petition to present,
the substance of which he would shortly state, from James
Baron Wensleydale, on the report of this bill. The
petitioner stated that he had by letters patent under the
Great Seal, of date 24th January, 1856, been created a
peer of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land
for the term of his natural life ; that her Majesty
had been pleased to direct the usual summons to be issued
for him to take his seat in Parliament ; that he had been
prevented from doing so by illness ; and that before he
could take his seat the question hal been referred to a
committee of privileges to consider the letters patent and
to report, The petitioner stated that the committee re-
ported that neither by the letters patent nor by the letter,
patent with the writ of summons was he entitle:l to take
his seat, and that the house afterwards agreed to that re-
port. The petitioner further stated that when he received
his letters patent he had no doubt of her Majesty's right
by prerogative to summon to the Souse of Lords any of
her subjects not disqualified by laW—to ennobte by grant-
ing a peerage for life one on whom she had conferred the
honour of knighthood ; and that he, theref. ire, con-
fidently expected that the decision of the )use
of
Lords would haVe been in favour of his ri.,ht to kit and
vote in that house. The petitioner then stated• that a
bill bad been introduced, the la t clause of which Tiro
vided that nothing contained in the bill. should affent.the
right of her Majesty to appoint Deputy Speakers hi the
House of Lords, but that it did not save her Majesty's
prerogative fir creatiog life peers to sit in Parliament,
and that it limited the number of life peers to be created
to four. The petitioner represented that he ought not
in any. way ti be. prejudiced or affeot4l. by any clues.
dons raised as to his- title or right to take his mat ;
that he had -au undoubted right t, petition the' House
of Lords reseinl its resolution,. which was not
final, .and,.. might :be altered; at- any time ; that. be felt
satisfied that the house would consider his case ;
1 that :he: • believed the question of, the creation ( f
tetion
life peers had -been so mixod up pith the question
of appellate jurisdiction that ' it was impossiole to
say' th'a't- they had decided the oily .question. a ect-
lug the petitioner:--viz.,. whether" her Majesty bad the
power by prerogative to issue a writ of.surnin.J.ns to
Peerinipb.44l fors, ).7,89 as. , entitle hun to sit
and vote in t'arliainent. The petitioner then },;rayeil.l.
that such epclments might• he introduced intentb e b
as should—leave-the; 'Royal :irerogative and. .the spat-
ti mer'e rlght nnafftcted-, by t Hiere-(1011?ciallY-.1r
vestion of her Maj estfe pr r gah:ve and the p-titio '
n r,
right 'was in hi:, ,ci',4d hobs 'dry fje considered' . toe.
~! end' ling effiiiient a bill to the-app 'Hate
jurisdictionel fife:Oilier hourw. (dear, hear.l fzi, he=
if ,_ll9,;yl,irkttis,Settc

in what respect he agreed with the petitioner. (Loud
cries of.)' Order," and ',s
,No.")
The, petition was, then ordered to lie on the table.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then rose to move the
second reading of the bill, which, as they were well

aware, had been-introdaced in' the other house on the
report of a committee appointed to inquire into tie state
of the appellate jurisdiction of that house, with the view
of seeing whether it could not be amended. That
committee, after receiving a great deal of evidence, might
be said to have in substance reported that the appellate

jurisdiction was notin a satisfactory state; that it was
capable of improvement ; and they adapted certain re-

coinmendations which would be found embodied in the

present bill. There could be no doubt of the great im-
portanie-of tliii question. In all suits both at common
law and equity the House of Lords was a court of appeal
in the last resort, and by its decision the law of the land

was finally settled. It wasnnotorious, and could not be

contradicted, that for some time very great dissatisfac-
tion bad been felt by suitors and the public generally with

the manner in which the appellate jurisdiction of the

other house had been exercised. Hon. members were

aware that though by the theory of the constitution the
appellate jurisdiction centred in the House of Lords,
practicallyit was not exercised by tbe whole body, but was
left to those members of the house who held judicial
offices, and were also members of that house. With the
'exception of the Lord Chancellor for the time being and
the Chief' Justice of the
.Queen's Bench, the judges
of the appellate court consisted generally of members of
that house who had held the office of Lord Chancellor.
It was quite evident that this body of judges, consist-
ing of the persons he bad referred to, must fluctuate ;
but, even supposing a sufficient number could be secured
to act as a Court of appeal,
,there was nothing which
made it oblige! ory on them—the law lords holdine office
excepted-4o attend. The result had been that the
number of law lords attending to hear appeals had been
reduced below the number thought neeessary for the dis-
charge of the business with satisfaction to suitors and the
public. It bad frequently happened that the number
of judges had' been. redeced to two,
,and sometimes to
one. When it was recollected that these appeals often
came from inferior courts of appeal with several judges,
'it would at once be admitted that it could not he satis-
factory to the public, or the suitors, that such appeals
should, in the last resort, be decided, perhaps, by only
one judge. He had heard -Scotch appeals decided by
' yne judge in the House of Lords, though these ap-
pktls were from the judgment of a court composed of
several judges necessarily conversant with Scotch law.
Often when only two judges were present they bed dif
fered In opinion, and the result was that the judgment
of the iufei-ior court remained unaltered. One cilia had
teen allufed to by his bon. and learned friend the Soli-
citor-General in his valuable evideiice before the com-
mittee, in which there had been conflicting decisions
between the Court of Exchequer and the Master of the
'TLere were only-tie judges present in the other
Louse when the case came on, and as the Lord Chancel-
lor differed from Lord Ste Leopards, the judgment Of
the Master of the Rolfe stood confirmed against a con-
trary j a lgmsnt of the judge of the Court of Exchequer.
It might even happen that the Lord Chancellor on
appeal might, under such -circumstanees, c infirm his
own judgment in the court below. There was another
great inconvenience which nothing but legislation.
could remedy.. At present the sitting of the House of
Lords as a court of appeal could only be co exten•
sive with the sitting of Parliament. The result was
that all its business was suspesded, from the
pr .rogation Of Parliament until it met for actual bted-
teess. Ih many cases this produced great inconvenience
to the parties, and also led to considerable arrears and.
delay. He believed that the shortest period in which en'
appeal could be brought in for hearing was two years.
Tue number of judges was not sufficient—that
number fluctuated—their attendance was voluntary, and
for ene-half the year all the proceedings were suspended:
These were tiie points, for consideration. There were
other topics referred to-in the evidence, relating to the
dress of 'the j edges, toe waist of cornbieation arid
arrangement, whictrrequired to be considered, lit which
d d no. require the interposition of the Legislature.
But tee matters to which he had referred could not be
rectified except by the Legislature, and therefore an
act of Parliament was necessary. He was aware of
the strong objections that might be urged to the mea-
sure • but the question to consider was, whether, when
the defects of the House of Lords as a court of appellate
jurisdiction, as at present constituted, were so glaring,
it was not necessary to do something to remedy those:
defects ? And whether, under all the circumstances,
the present measure was not the best that could be pro-
posed ? That was the question which *he had to invite
Them dispassionately to consider. 'He knew that some'
thought that the simplest course would be to withdraw
the appellate jurisdiction from the House of Lerds.. (Hear.
He recognised that cheer, buedeeired, to know wheteer
there were not serious, if not insuperable, difficulties to
such a course ? Would it not lead to delay, and leave
the unhappy suitors in the same position in which they
now were ? Many people thought that to deprive the
House of Lords of its judicial functions would be to strip
it of ope element of its imp .irt ince and dignity. Ha did
not leek at the matter in that light, and did not, con-
stitutionally speaking, see any necessary connection be-
t veen the functions efethe House. of_Leris and its judi •
cial duties, which, as he had, observed were exercised
only by the law lerde, the lay lords being present only
formally, the remaining mute on such occasions.. Ile
could not help thinking that the dignity of the House of
Lords would be more likely to be impaired if the exercise
of its judicial functions was not satisfactory, but a cause
of co uplaiut to suitors and the public. Oa the other
hand he knew many who objected to divest the House of
Lords of its judicial functions. The question had to be
answered to what tribunal, if these duties were to be
transferred, would they transfer them ? Redid not think
they could proceed to constitute a tribunal of the last re-
sort, independent of the House of Lords, without re-
c nistituting the whole judicature of the country. He
knew it had been-said that all the appellate business
might ne transferred to the J udicial C mmittee of the
Privy Council. He admitted that it was impossible to
conceive a court, the functions of which could be die-
Ala-ged in a in, re admirable manner ; but they must
not overlook the great difficulties of ttansferrtag the
whole appellate business of the Howe of L irds to the
Judicia Cnnteittee of the Privy Council. That court,
with one or two exceetions, consisted of members of the
legal profe .sion who had held office or who hold judicial
office. One of these exceptions was a right honourable
gentleman— a shining light of justice, who must ado
dignity, lustre, and efficiency to any court of which be
was a member, and whose nen-promotion to a h.gher
judicial office. had ever-been a siurce of regret to him
Atterney-General). It would not be fair to call on
th ice members who tad discharged their term of effice,
and with regard .to those who actually held office it
ought to be kept in view that, they only attended the
Council .occasionally, that their time was not largely
drawn upon ; but if the whole appellate jurisdiction was
to be confined to the Council it would be imp issible for
the superior judges to devote that time to the Council
which was due to the administration of justice in their
own courts, Moreover, they ceu d not divest the Houte
of Issesis of its appellate jurisdiction without the consent
of that house, and as fares hecouid learntheir appeliahe
jurisdiction was the last thing -which the House of Lords
would give up. That being the case they must take the
best means in their power of , making the House of
Lords efficient as a court of the last resort. A=-
'tempts bad been made to amend the court without
resorting to legislative interference. The house was
aware that Lord Wensleydale, , whose petition they
bad heard presented that night—a distinguished man
and meeting, the honour .more than any one—had been
selected for a judjcial meiuberpf the other house. The
attempt to introduce the noble bold had failed, because,
though many persons were.of opinion that her Majesty
had done no more than exercise her undoubted pre, oga-
tive, the constitution put it in the power of the ilouse of
Lords to determine on the validity of the patent. Under
these
,clreumstances Lord Wensleydale bad not been
able,te take his seat. To secure a sufficient number of
judges it was necessary .to elevate distinguished mem-
bers of the legal profession to sit and vo-e in the other
house. He believed that if the House of Lords could
prevent
,her Majesty calling eminent judicial men to the
Hogse of Lords as life peers, the effect would be to ex-
clude some of the ablest and fittest lawyers from tbat
_house, because few of them could afford, with- a due.
regard to their families, to take on themselves the dig-
nity of an hereditary peerage. Court-i ha I been multi-
plied—business hart been diminished and divided—
much .to the advantage of the administration of justice
—but large fortunes, sufficient to support the onus
of the peerage, were not now made at the bar. Tee house
of Lords bad cicised the door, with some few exceptions,
t ) life peers. The jurisdiction as at present existing was
condemned by the house itself.; ti,e mitter was one of
great importance, one in which no he erect but that of
the public ought-to be allowed to prevail. It ought not
to be made a party question. They could not create life
peers. Some persons were averse to accept an hereditary
peerage, and.the jurisdictiOn could not be transferred.
' Were they prepared to enter into a contest with the
House of Lords on the question ? The result to the
suitors would be ruinous, and on the whole he thought
the better,course.te take was that proposed by the bill.
Even if the difficulty of.life peerages was got over there
remained another, difficulty, that. of making the sittings
of the appellate tribunal co-existent with the sitting of
Parliament. By the plan proposed her Majesty would
he enabled to introduce into the other house a member
,of Scotch judicature, which vvoull supply that ?retell
was felt to be at present a grievous, almost a ecanda-
!nue proceeding. At present appeals from the Court of
Session were decided by one or two lords, who, what-
ever might- be theirdsnew.lecige of English law,. had' not
that kno wledge_of _the Scotch . law. .which. the judgea of
the court appealed from had. He believed that the
Scotch peiple.vrdeld be 'glad to see in the appellee: court
ef the other houseat least one
member of [the Scottish
courts, -who. would give his assistance in appeal cases.
EMI present plan would enable the Government to. proe
Ode touthateweeite It 'was contended, also, by the op.
goner:As of.the bitlehat it would operate as a surrender'
of the prerogative of the Creel). (lliar.) All he could.
day in .auaiXer to. that objection Was, that al.:hough he
should be prepared to support that prerogative whenever
the fitthig epportpnity presented itselfee(a laugh)—yet
he did not mushier it expedient that the House of Cum-'
rnoriu stkopl4494o;tip,in its defence to theAejectieh pf
. 'measure which tensed
,the effect that improvement
in the appellate jurisdiction of, the liaise of .:L wcle
Which members of every party dawned to .be.,aVio-
luttltrleoesugy, -He could only present that. measure
to the notice of the house ne_ Ole hest mode of gettine
r-Out of a difatmittei and heerineter,nuiritainteat unicera hore.
tretebers could show etiettenyreepre eetb,factsry way of
‘Overchtaieig the ob7.tactenTby:which the qtw.ti9.n
!eel eras open to tiwcifoigOttali(kiit Lit