The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 19, 1861.

Clausec 247 to 250 were ogreed to, as were also the re-
maining clauses.

The committee then proceeded to consider the postponed
clauses.

Clauses 13, 14, and 33 were agreed to.

On clause 37,

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he intended to pro-
pose as a substitute a new clause fixing the salaries of the
present official assignees in town. at £1,200 a-year, and in
the country at £l,OOO a-year ; the future assignees in town
to have £l,OOO a-year, and in the country SSOO a-year. It
was also his intention to propose the substitution of a new
clause for clause 44, abolishing the fees on private as well
as public sittings.
Clauses 38, 39, 47, and 48 were agreed to.

The ATTORNEY •GENER AL said that it was intended
to propose new clauses as to the payment of messengers.
This would be done on the bringing up of the report.

Several verbal amendments were made in the schedules.
In reply to Mr. MOFFATT and Mr. MURRAY,

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was not intended
to interfere with the privilege of solicitors appearing for
their clients either in court or in chamber. They would be
able to appear in every court except the supreme court.
The ATTORNEY• GENERAL proposed the new clause
fixing the salaries of the official assign ees.
Mr. MURRAY objected to the proposed sum of £1,200
a-year for official assignees in London, and moved that it
be reduced to £BOO a-year, the difference in their remu-
neration to be made up from a scale of fees sanctioned by
the Lord Chancellor.

Mr. WALPOLE objected to the proposed mode of pay-
ing the official assignees. He thought that they ought not
to be remunerated by fixed salaries. They could not pay
the official assignees by means of fees without perpetuating
thedisproportion complained of ; and, upon the whole, there••
fore—though he would not say that even that would remedy
the difficulties—the committee on the subject had come to
the conclusion that it would be best to pay in part by fees
and in part by salaries.
The ATTORNEY•GENERAL said it should be recol-
lected that the official assignees under this bill occupied a
very different position from that which they had hereto-
fore occupied. They had now got an express and definite
duty, to be discharged under the superintendence of the
Court, and the Court would virtually superintend every
proceeding. The house would observe that they were re-
quired to make returns half-yearly of the business trans •
acted, which would afford an opportunity for a comparison
between the different official assignees. They had found it
impossible to put any limits to their salary if they were to
be paid by fees. He thought it better to give these gentle-
men credit for having a proper sense of the responsibilities
and duties of their position, in like manner as they gave
credit to judges and others. (Hear, hear.) There was no

more reason to suppose that those gentlemen would neglect
their duties than that the commissioners or the judges
would do so.
The amendment firing the salary at £1,200 a year was
then agreed to, and the clause, as amended, was ordered to
stand part of the bill.
A new clause was ten introduced to give solicitors the
power of practising in the court.
Mr. MALINS said the messengers were an ancient and

descrying body of public servants in connexion with this

court. No body of nen had more faithfully performed
their duty with fewe• public losses. The oldest of them
ha been 42 years in the court, and the youngest 12 years.
Their emoluments hid been considerable, and they now
asked Parliament nct to disturb all their plans for life,
although they did not make any inordinate demands.
They only claimed benefit for the present occupants of the
offices they had so lmg held, and proposed that the new
regulations should arply only to their successors. He moved
—" That every messenger holding office at the time of the
passing of this act siall receive, in lieu of fees, an annual
salary equal to the anount of the fees received by him after
deducting his workixg expenses, such salary to be assessed
by the chief registra', and to be estimated upon an average
of the sums receivedby such messenger for a period of five
years last preceding the passing of this act, such salary to
be paid at the same imes and in like manner as the salaries
to be paid to the offrers mentioned in tho schedule (A) to
this act." This wis just what had been done in the case
of the official assignees, and he saw no reason why the same
should not be done n the case of the messengers. He hoped
they would lean to the side of justice to the individual
rather than avoid ioing so for the sake of some small
amount which migh be withheld on the ground of public
benefit.

Mr. BRISTONV bought that individuals who had done
their duty for so many years with satisfaction to the
country should be tested with the greatest consideration,
and therefore he waild support the proposition just made.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT srid one of the greatest objections to the
clause was, that it cid not fix a minimum. One gentleman
engaged in the department referred to had £9OO a-year for
some years, and hevery probably would not object to £5OO
a-year in future; tut then there should be some certainty
as to the amount (f income which such public servants
receive. (Hear, %ear.) He would vote against the
amendment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was his inten-
tion that the existing registrar should receive £9OO a-year,
but he intended to insert a provisi•m that in future the
salary should not exceed £5OO. Those who would be de-
prived of compensation fees woitld now be amply repaid by
an adequate pension.
Mr. MALINS said he was not in a situation to divide
on the question, bit as those officers received fees just as
the judges did under the sanction of the law, they ought
not to be suddenly deprived of them without compensation.
The amendment was withdrawn.
Mr. GARNETT moved the following clause And
whereas the fees and emoluments of registrars of County
Courts before which any petitions under an act of Parlia-
ment made and passed in the first and second years of the
reign of her present Majesty, chapter 110, and an act made
and passed inthe 10th and 11th years of the same reign, cap.
102, have been heard, may be seriously diminished by the
operation and effect of this act, and it is just and reasonable
that such registrars should be indemnified against such loss;
be it enacted, that at the end of two years next after the
passing of this ret the Commissioners of her Majesty's
Treasury shall, u?on the application of any such registrar,
by such means and in such manner as they may think pro-
per, inquire into and ascertain the annual amount, to be
computed upon as average of seven years immediately pre-
ceding the passing of this act, of the fees and emoluments
received by such registrars for their own use under the au-
thority of the sail acts; and the said commissioners shall,
upon the like application, also ascertain, in such manner as
they may think proper, the total amount of fees and emolu-
ments received by such registrars for their own use under
this act during each year after the passing of this act, and
the said commissioners are hereby authorised and empow-
ered annually to award to such registrar the deficiency,
when and so often as the same shall occur, between the last
mentioned amount and the average annual amount so as-
certained as aforesail, and the sum awarded shall be paid
out of any moneys which may be provided by Parliament
m nty Providedao t
oa lb%
ev apyasi, thatpaid
to a
ntdh the
amongstaggregate
al l
afomrounthatt
such registrars in any one year shall not exceed the sum of
£2,000.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that this was a
most objectionable clause for compensation. It meant this
—that the house was not to improve the law unless they
ofPsuurPch°s indemnity
compensated the persons in question, who were not entitled
to it.

The clause was rejected.
Lord STANLEY said that this bill imposed additional
duties on the county courts, and he understood the hon.
and learned Attorney-General to say that an opportunity
would be afforded for considering the question of increasing
the salaries of those judges on account of the increased
duties imposed upon them. Now, it was clear that this
matter must emanate from the Government, for no inde-
pendent member could take upon himself to make a pro-
posal of this kind, and he, therefore, wished to know when
the opportunity would be afforded of discussing this
question.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he was de-

sirous of equalising the salaries of the county judges, but
he had no fund from bankruptcy to enable him to deal with
the question ; but there must be a committee upon stamps
and salaries, with respect to the compensation to be
granted to messengers. When that question came before
the house, then the noble lord would be in a position to
raise the question to which he had referred, fort he increase
must come out of the Consolidated Fund,
Sir J. PAKINGTON expressed his approval of the pro-
posed addition to the salaries of county court judges on
account of the increased duties they would have to perform.
He should wish, however, first to have the opinion of the
chairman as to the mode in which that object was now to be
attained.
Mr. BRIGHT said he thought it was premature to vote
away an increase of salary to the 59 judges of county courts
before the house know anything about the amount of addi-
tional work that would be thrown upon them. It was ob-
vious, too, that the work would be very unequally divided,
and county court judgeships were offices so much sought
after, that if the hon. and learned gentlemaa had waited
another year, he might have found that no increase would
be needed at all.

Mr. CLAY reminded the committee that county court
judges were now receiving £1,200 a year only, instead of
.£1,500, as was first intended by Parliament, and which only
a few of the oldest appointed still enjoyed. Those gentle-
men, therefore, had a very good title to the proposed increase-
Mr. WALPOLE said that the rates of remuneration of
judges were extremely various. They were paying com-
missioners in bankruptcy £l,BOO a year, some county court
judges £1,500 a year, and others only £1,200. By this bill
certain duties were to be transferred from the Bankruptcy
Court to the county courts, and as it would be impossible to
give satisfaction so long as the existing anomaly prevailed,
the subject ought now to undergo careful consideration with
a view to its final adjustment on proper principles. He
should like to know, however, whether it would be possible
to take the report and to re-commit the bill on the same
day. He doubted whether the suggestion of the hon. and
learned gentleman was practicable.
r Mr. DISRAELI observed that it would not be desirable
to report the bill before Easter. The subject of the uoa••