The Sun.
London, England, 1860-08-25 00:00:00

ER

NT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five-o'clock.

THE MARRIAGE LAWS.

Lord REDESDALE presented 23 petitions from Liver-
pool and other places against any alteration in the marriage
law to legalise the marriage with a deceased wife's sister.
HIGHWAYS LAND CONSOLIDATION BILL.
The NosLx LORD also laid on the table a bill calculated
to effect the consolidation of the law relating to highways.
The bill was read a first time.
LAW REFORM.

The LORD CHANCELLOR called the attention of the
house to the measures for law reform introduced into that
house during the present session. The noble and learned
lord having laid on the table a bill to repeal a great
number of statutes, said he did so, not with the
idea of its being passed this session, but that it
might be printed, circulated, and considered previous to
the commencement of the next session. In proceeding to
notice the legal reforms that had been introduced into their
lordships' house, he observed that the endeavours in the
direction of law reform had been looked upon as a failure ;
but he was not of that opinion, because, although un-
doubtedly there had been rainy failures, measures had
been passed which would, without doubt, greatly benefit
the public. He felt great pleasure that the Court of Chan-
cery Bill had passed both houses, and only awaited the
Royal Assent. The Companies' Bill, one to conso-
lidate the whole of the laws relating to joint-stock
companies, had also received the concurrence of
all parties in their lordships' house, and having passed all
its stages, it was sent to the Commons on the sth of March.
Unfortunately it did not appear on the business paper until
nearly the close of the session, and when it was taken under
discussion it was thought better that it should,
for the present, be withdrawn. Several bills
for the consolidation of the criminal law were
next introduced, and it was much to be regretted after the
immense labour that had been expended on those bills that
they had also to be withdrawn, and he could not refrain from
saying that he looked upon such a proceeding with the
greatest regret. The next bill introduced was one to
deal with persons guilty of administering poisons ; that
bill however was more fOrtunate, and had passed all its
stages, and received theroyal assent. The bill for enabling
courts of common law to exercise equitable jurisdiction in
certain oases had also passed, and the benefit it
would confer would be incalculable. He had also
introduced a bill to put an end to the scan-
dalous system of English bankrupts going to
Scotland to get what was vulgarly termed white-washed,
after a residence in that countryof 40 days which was inva-
riably spent in deer stalking and grouse shooting. The
measure, he rejoiced to say, had also received the sanction of
Parliament, andaeystem had been abolished which had long
been very justly complained of. The Divorce Bill was sent
to the Commons at an early period, but after considerable
delay the searching eye of some members discovered an
informality in the bill, and raised a question of privilege as
to one of its clauses. It was shown that it was an invasion
of privilege that the Queen's Proctor should have a coun-
sel to assist him ; but it was asked that he should be allowed
certain fees, and that they should be paid out of the consoli-
dated fund. This certainly had escaped the vigilance of
those who prepared the clause ; but the House of Commons
instead of doing what they would have been fully justified
in doing, namely, rejecting the bill, in the handsomest
manner, seeing that there was no intention to infringe their
privileges, merely said, "take care this is not drawn into a
precedent," and the bill was allowed to pass, and had come
back to their lordships again. The next measure he wished
to mention was the Endowed Charities Bill. With all his
(the Lord Chancellor's) respect for the Court of Chancery,
he thought it was an improvement that an application to the
Court of Chancery should not be requisite on every occa-
sion when funds were to be dealt with in the hands of the
Charity Commissioners, whose assiduity and zeal in their
office of trustees were most conspicuous. The only other
bill with which he would trouble their lordships was one
to enable the Lord Chancellor, with the assistance of:the
equity judges, to carry into affect the recommendations
of the commissioners appcGnted to consider the best mode
of examining witnesses in Chancery. It had appeared to
him (the Lord Chancellor) that under the authority of
former Acts of Parliament, it was possible for the Chancellor
to carry these recommendations into effect without further
powers, but his noble and learned friend (Lord Lyndhurst)
was of a different opinion, and out of deference to him the
bill was introduced. Great progress had already been made
towards carrying out those recommendations, and he had
no doubt that by the end of the long vacation orders might
be framed and promulgated under the authority of the Lord
Chancellor and the other equity judges, by means of which
these recommendations would become binding on the court.
The only remaining bill was tone which was still before the
other house of Parliament, and still remained in the balance
—it did not, therefore, become him to say much respecting
it. The object of the bill was to provide that when a divorce
a vinculo matrimonii had been duly pronounced by the
Scotch courts, it should be valid over all England, instead
of being valid in one part of the island and invalid in ano-
ther. The bill was only to eome into operation where the
parties were domiciled in Scotland, and tbat most disrepu-
table practice would beput a stop to of procuring a sentence
of divorce when the parties came into Scotland for the pur-
pose of having a divorce, and of committing the act for which
a divorce was sought. If the other house of Parliament,
upon reconsideration, would admit these two clauses, he
(the Lord Chancellor) should greatly rejoice. But whether
that were so or not, he trusted he had pointed out to their
lordships that various bills had passed that house with the
approbation of the other from which very material benefits
might be expected. (Hear.) His noble friend (Lord St.
Leonardo) had already introduced a learned and valuable
measure for the improvement of the law of property ; the
noble and learned lord opposite (Lord Cranworth) had im-
proved the law relating to trustees and committees ; and
Lord Brougham, who was absent from the house, had largely
contributed to the reform of the law. It was altogether a
most monstrous exaggeration to say that this session had
been a failure so far as law reform was concerned. He was
happy to say that by the course of steady reform which
had been introduced into the administration of justice, the
business of the courts was now in a more satisfactory state
than it had ever been. (Hear, hear.) He remembered the
time when there was such an arrear that appeals stood for
years in their lordship? paper unheard. There had recently
been great improvements, but the hope that all appeals set
down would be decided before the session was concluded
had hardly ever been realised. At the end of the present
session, however, they had been able to dispose of not only
the appeals set down for hearing before the session begun,
but several which had been placed in the list since. On the
whole, thirty-two appeals had been heard, so that at the
beginning of next session twenty-four would remain for
hearing. (Hear.) He would take an example of the de-
spatch with which cases were now disposed of—the history
of one only. It was that of the Royal Westminster Palace
Hotel. It used to be said that Chancery suits never came
to an end, that there was no such thing upon record as a
Chancery suit actually heard and disposed of. In this in-
stance a joint-stock company had built an hotel, and pro-
posed to let a part which was completed for the purpose of
its being converted into Government offices for the time.
This was opposed by certain shareholders, and on lhe 17th
of May in this year (1860) a bill was filed by those who
opposed the measure. The cause came on before Vice
Chancellor Wood en the 31st May, who decided in favour
of the defendants. The appeal came on on the 11th June,
but the Lords Justices were divided, and therefore the
judgment of the Vice-Chancellor stood unaltered. The
appeal to the House of Lords was heard on Monday, the
6th of August, and on the 7th of August judgment was de-
livered. Thus a edit which was commenced on the 17th of
May on the 7th of August was finally disposed of. (Hear.)
Ire could only say that, whilst health and strength re-
mained to him, he would endeavour to promote the de-
spatch of legal business, and he would most cordially co-
operate with any successor of his own in effecting the same
end.

Lord ST. LEONARDS said that with regard is the first
bill to which his noble and learned friend had alluded, he
was not struck with the prospect of its very great utility.
One of the measures which had been brought forward was
undoubtedly a considerable one. It was founded upon the
report of certain common law judges, who proposed to take
to themselves every part of the jurisdiction of the Court of
Chancery. That measure, if it had been passed, would have
entirely destroyed the court, and he held that the common-
law judges had neither the time nor the knowledge, neither
the practical experience nor the machinery to enable them
to supersede the judges in Chancery. The bill went upstairs
to a select committee, who struck out all those clauses except
two very innocent ones, and the bill thus curtailed had been
passed ; but as passed it was a very simple affair. The bill
for altering the mode of taking evidence in Chancery would,
in his opinion, wholly disorganise the court; and it would
render the office of the two examiners, whose salaries had
lately been augmented on account of the increase in the
amount of their labours, a perfect sinecure. If any one
wnt before those gentlemen, their evidence would only be
t e
reated as a simple affidavit ; and therefore people would
make
aarilklavits instead of going before them. He (Lord St.
'''d 8) contended, therefore, that very little had been
done for the Courtth of, Chancery during the past year ; nor
did he
sthelievuetadathatttthhat was very much to be regretted, for
nte, and that it court was at present in au admirable
vraee presided over by excellent judges. As
to the criminal lawreform, it had beea in turn the object
of every noble and learnedoildord's labours. In 185'2 he had
himself proposed to
;3aor to superintend a con-
solidation, of the criminal law:eandsed upon the report of the
Statute Law Commissioner,
on
the the papers which had
since then accumulated
,tject take a
would
strong man to lift. Indeed, he
a hesitation in say-
ing that the consolidation bills had
than LlOO,OOO. They already cost the
country no less a sum
had been
t tw l "
made the subject of perpetual commissions, committee,
considerations, and examinations during the ,as
years ; and he ventured try say that they wouldnevere Ivee
passed unless Parliament was prepared to put some confi-
dence in the result. The committee before which they
went was a wonderful one. It consisted of Lord Lynd-
hurst, Lord Brong tam, Lord Truro, Lord Cranworth, the
noble lord on the w yolsaek, and himself. They worked at,