The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-08 00:00:00

OITIIS' BILL.

Lord J. RUSSELL proposed the postponement of
the consideration of the Lords' amendment to the Oath'
Bill to Monday nexl. He understood there was no ob
kction to the motion, and &so that her Majesty's Go-
vernment would allo 4, it to take precedecce of the other
orders of the day. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI said he believed it would be con-
venient to the house that the 0 tthi' .131 should be
taken first on Monday. (EDar, hear.)
The motion was agreed to.
PROBATE COURT.

lOn the motionf7radc:urnrnentJilMonday,
Mr. WARREN called the attention of the house to
the operation of the Probate Act of last session, with
reference to the right of employing barristers-at-law in
non-contentious business in the Probate Court, and bar-
risters and attornies-at-law in the Court of Ad-
miralty, supposed to have been conferred on the
pu'elic in coosiderwiol of the compensation awarded
by that att to proctors and .ethera. He entered
;iito the position of proctors and barristers before the
passing of the late act, and referred to the cause intro-
.oiced last session int. the Probate Court permitting
men:hers ef the bar to practice in that court, in consi-
deration of which the house liberally granted compen-
sa:i:n to Vie proctors for the loss of business lily to
ensue. Tee result, however, was that the business cf
the court was 011:y thro:vn open in cases of a contention-
character, which was by far the smallest amount of
business that came before the court, He urged that a
committee should be appointed to inquire into the mat-
ter. If it vitro not done be should bring in a bill relative
to admitting the bar generally to practise in the Pro •
bate Court, and a's a in the Curt of Admiralty.
Mr. HADFIELD spke in favour of throwing open
•.,IreQe courts to the piton° and appealed to the late
Attorney•G,neral to state bow it was the clause in the
bill throwing open the Court of Admiralty, agreed to in
that house, 'was afterwards thruwo
Sir R. BErH ELL a sented to the importance of
throwing open these courts. The clause referred to was
,truck out of the bill because spec.fic legislation was
refused for the Court of Admiralty before it could be
thrown open.

Mr. COLLIER said he felt certain the house would
never have voted compensation to the proctors if the
court was not to here been thrown open. Instead of
that they found the court was only partially thro en open,
and he objected to the construction put upon the de-
cision of the house by the rules that had been laid down
relative to contentious and non-contentious business.
Mr. MALINS said he moved the introduction of the
compensation clause, and what he then stated would be
the effect of this bill had been realised. The business
of the proctors, as a body, had been utterly destroyed,
and that showed the justice of compensation. He did
not think the amount of compensation to be given
would be so great as 300,000/.. as had been stated, but
would be found not to exceed 80,000/., or 100,0001,, as
he stated when the clause was under discussion.
Sir B. BETHELL—I think that is pretty well.
(Laughter.)
Mr. MALINS—Yoe, it is. The hon, and learned
gentleman said the clause relative to throwing open the
Court of Admiralty was struck out of the bill on the
suggestion of a learned judge, who considered it would
be inoperative unless machinery were first provided to
ensure the proper discharge of the busiuese.
The subject then dropped.
Mr. J. LOCKE called• the attention of the house to
the recent appointment of Justices of the Peace for the
City of Canterbury ; and asked the Secre'ary cf State
for the Homo Department, whether Mr. John Pout had
been appointed one of such Justices, and whether be
wee the person mentioned in Schedules C and F of the I
Repert of the Commissioners appointed to inquire
into the existence of corrupt practices at the elec-
tion of Members to serve in Parliament for that
City in the year 1852, an 1 at previous elections.
Teti hon. and learned geetleman read the headings of
the two schedules—one was " a list of persons who
have given money to voters to give their votes" fer
the Conservative candidatee, in 1852, and the other
was a list of persons who had given money to voters in
the election of 1817, to vote for a certain candidate
fit Centern.iry, iu b,Lu these schadu!,s Mr. Jo::n ut
waa "ticketed," and it was an extraordinary thing
that the Lord Chancellor should have appointed a per
sou so ticketed as a justice of the peace. Oely conceive
what a state of thins would be presented in Canter
bury,ifat a future time an election took place th,-re,
„%b
Ivoters were bribed? If the briber were brought
befor • Mr. John Pout, only conceive his situettoo.
(Laughter) The briber in such a case might objeo
to tee jurigdiction
of
Esl2that magis h
' Woe blaule for 01 a thing trate, any, the I
the
Lord Chancellor, who made such appointraeute. 11ei