The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-22 00:00:00

COURT OF CHANCERY.

Lord BROUGHAM presented petition complaining of
the delay arising in the Court of Chancery. This peti-
, tion was in favour of appointing additional judges, but he did
not agree in that prayer.
PRIVATE BILLS.
Lord REDESDALE moved that no private bills brought
from the House of Commons shall be read a second time
after Tuesday, the 2d of August.—Agreed to.
DIVORCE COURT BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the second read-
ing of this bill, which proposed that all the puisne
judges should become members of the court and take it
in turns to sit with the Judge Ordinary, and form what was
termed full courts more frequently, by which means, he
trusted, the arrears of business would be expeditiously dis-
posed of. The bill further proposed that when the learned
judge thought proper the court might sit with closed doors,
as some of the cases that were heard there were totally unfit
for the public, and could only tend to demoralisation.
Another provision was that, where necessary, the assistance
of the Attorney-General should be called in, and thus exer-
cise some control in certain cases.

Lord BROUGHAM supported the bill.
Lord CHELMSFORD was opposed to the bill. He
thought a separate number of new judges should
be appointed, as the time of the judges of the superior
courts was already fully occupied.
Lord CRANWORTH said he paid great attention to the
proceedings of the court in question, and he must say that
they had not attained that celebrity which he thought was
desirable. He did not think the plan proposed would meet
the evil which at present existed, but he quite agreed that
the course recommended by the bill was the right one to be
pursued in the first instance. He thought that one mode
of meeting one of the evils complained of, was by granting
a decree nisi in the first instance.
Lord REDESDALE said he did not purpose to object
to this bill, but he denied that the proceedings of the
Divorce Court could be said to assimilate to the course
which had been pursued by their lordships in divorce cases.
He thought that in all cases of a judicial separation of mar-
riages, the proceedings should be made as public as possible.
The Earl of WICKLOW said he could not understand
why it was that the House of Commons struck out the
clause which was inserted in the bill when it went before
that house, by which its provisions were to be extended to
Ireland and the colonies. It was said that a separate act
on this subject should be passed for Ireland, but he, for one,
wished that laws which were passed for the social improve-
ment of this country should be extended to Ireland.
The Earl of DONOUGH'MORE concurred in the view
of his noble friend who had last addressed their lordships.
The object of this measure was to extend relief to the
middle and lower elasses, and therefore they ought to be
careful of increasing the expense. He did hope that the
noble and learned lord would consider this point.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE wished to say a few
words on extending this act to Ireland. They were in such
a position that they must legislate for Ireland. He depre
cated the establishment of any tribunal in that country. If
any change was to take place there, it should be done as
quietly as possible. He recommended the introduction of
one or two clauses, to put an end to actions of crim. con.
in Ireland, and to give relief through the courts of this
country.

Lord DUNGANNON thought the public morals had
not been improved by the publication of the reports of this
court. He was of opinion that a gross act of injustice
would be done to Ireland unless they had the benefits and
conveniences intended to be conferred by this bill.
Lord TEYNHAM thought that the expense of the pro-
cedure should be diminished as much as possible. He
should support the second reading.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he could have no
possible objection to introducing a clause or clauses extend-
ing the benefits of this measure to Ireland, and if any noble
lord would take the responsibility of proposing such clauses
he would make no objection whatever. In fact, he had
himself prepared an amendment for that purpose, but he
had been induced to give it up by the strong representations
of persons connected with Ireland. In certain cases he
thought the Divorce Court should sit with closed doors,
and then there would be no violation of public decency.
The bill was read a second time.
THE ATTORNEY AND SOLICITORS' BILL.
The report of amendments on this bill was brought up
and received.